20 July 2022
“But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman’s hand.” [Ezekiel 33:6]
“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” [Ephesians 6:12]
Presbyterians Week Headlines
[1] ”Adaptive Reuse” of ARP Church Properties in Charlotte
[3] Archie Battersbee: Judge Forces Removal of Life Support against Parent Wishes
[4] Abortion of Black Babies Has Destroyed the Equivalent of the Entire Population of Blacks in 1960
[5] More Black Babies Aborted in New York City in 2016 Than Born
Additional Articles of Interest
—
[1] ”Adaptive Reuse” of ARP Church Properties in Charlotte
A 14 July 2022 Charlotte Observer article titled “Here Are Ten Churches Transformed Through Adaptive Reuse in Charlotte” by Sam Carnes, Palmer Magri, and Astrid Bridgwood describes how ten closed Charlotte, North Carolina churches have been “Adaptive[ly] Reuse[d],” including the following Associate Reformed Presbyterian (ARP) Churches:
- Parkwood Avenue ARP Church at 1017 Parkwood Avenue – now an apartment complex – church property sold in 1968
- Tabernacle Associated Reformed Presbyterian Church at 926 Elizabeth Avenue (merged in the 1990’s with Craig Avenue ARP Church to become Craig Tabernacle ARP Church) – now the Great Aunt Stella Center, a non-denominational wedding and other celebration venue
- McColl Center at 721 North Tryon Street – once the home of First ARP Church – now an art center and gallery
[Editor’s Note: Please email any additional historical information about these churches to info-co@christianobserver.org.]
+ The Charlotte Observer, 600 South Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28202, 704-358-5000, acaulkins@charlotteobserver.com
+ Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, 918 South Pleasantburg Drive Suite 127, Greenville, South Carolina 29607, 864-232-8297, Fax: 864-271-3729
A Christian mayoral candidate for a London borough has launched legal action after being sacked by her employer for expressing Christian beliefs on marriage as part of an election manifesto.
Maureen Martin, 56, from Lewisham, London, who is being supported by the Christian Legal Centre, was dismissed by her housing association employer, L&Q, for gross misconduct following three complaints.
The case is believed to be the first of its kind to see a political candidate sacked by their employer for their Christian beliefs.
Miss Martin had worked for L&Q as a housing manager for 13 years with an unblemished record and had good relationships with LGBT colleagues and service users in her non-customer facing role.
Standing for the Christian People’s Alliance (CPA) since 2015, Miss Martin had previously had nomination papers signed by a previous line manager without issue, and in January 2022 had declared her role with the CPA on her employer’s register of interests.
On 18 April 2022, Miss Martin, as part of her election campaign to become Mayor of Lewisham, had posted her manifesto to residents throughout the borough.
In the manifesto, Miss Martin, who is an ordained Christian minister and President of the CPA, had outlined her political position on fly tipping, knife crime and tax, and on marriage she had written:
‘Marriage: I pledge to cut through political correctness and simply state the truth that natural marriage between a man and a woman is the fundamental building block for a successful society, and the safest environment for raising children.’
The words were taken almost exactly from the CPA’s election manifesto
Following the publication of the manifesto, an image of the leaflet was posted on Twitter suggesting the manifesto ‘broke the law’ and was ‘hate speech.’
Miss Martin’s Twitter account was searched, and it was discovered that Miss Martin was employed by L&Q, which was not stated in her manifesto.
Three complainants suggested to L&Q’s chief executive in correspondence that Miss Martin’s beliefs should have no place at L&Q, described her as ‘bigoted’ who should receive ‘anti-oppressive training’, and called for her to face disciplinary action.
L&Q houses over 250,000 people in the south-east and widely advertises its objectives to maintain a high-ranking in Stonewall’s Equality index. The housing association also recently been nominated for an award from LGBT campaigning outlet, Pink News.
Following the complaints, Miss Martin was suspended, investigated, hindered from campaigning as part of the election and then dismissed for allegedly bringing L&Q into disrepute, breaching social media policy and failing to declare political interests.
As part of the investigation, she was also interrogated about retweets from the CPA’s account which questioned the Vatican embracing LGBT pride and transgender athletes participating in women’s sport.
In her dismissal letter, Miss Martin was told her views could be: “perceived to be discriminatory, hurtful and offensive views towards members of the LGBTQ+ community, non-traditional families, and abortion.”
Miss Martin will now take legal action against L&Q on the grounds of discrimination, harassment, indirect discrimination, and unfair dismissal.
Lawyers will say that her dismissal was in breach of her right to political speech under Articles 9 and 10 of the ECHR and that her dismissal was ‘outside the band of reasonable responses’ in all the circumstances of the case.
Furthermore, they will argue L&Q maintained an entrenched position during disciplinary procedures and that the protected characteristic of sexual orientation took priority over that of religion or belief. The case has been described as an ‘attack on democracy’ and the first of its kind in seeing a political candidate sacked for their Christian beliefs.
‘I am determined to fight for justice’
Miss Martin and her family have lived in Lewisham for 62 years after her parents emigrated from Jamaica.
She has described the devastating impact her sudden sacking has had on her including the loss of income while living with and caring for an elderly parent.
She said: “I was devastated, but also sadly not surprised that L&Q would treat me in this way.
“I have been an exemplary employee, and I believe my Christian beliefs have been an asset to L&Q. I have always gone above and beyond to help the people L&Q serve.
“It is telling that Lewisham council dismissed the same complaints against me because my political speech is protected.
“I have a right to express my own Christian beliefs in my own private time and should not be required to self-censor valid beliefs on marriage, abortion and US politics.
“I would not treat people in any way other than professionally. It was a general statement I made and I am quite within my right to make it.
“We either have freedom of speech in the UK, or we do not. We must have the freedom to disagree with each other without it resulting in people having their lives torn apart.
“I had stood as a political candidate while working for L&Q for six years without any issues.
“It is disturbing how Christian beliefs on marriage, which have been held and expressed for thousands of years, are being silenced and treated with such hostility and disdain.
“The message this is sending is if you want to engage politically and make a difference in your community, but if your views don’t line up with the liberal agenda, you can potentially be fired from your job.
“If my manifesto had been in support of same-sex marriage, would I have had the same response?
“I am determined to fight for justice and to ensure that no other Christian political candidates and employees go through what I have.”
Attack on democracy
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: “For speaking about a positive vision of life and marriage as a building block for the good of our society she was silenced and de-platformed in the political space for boldly speaking about her faith in Jesus.
“We have never seen a case like this which sends a crushing message to anyone who believes in Christian marriage and wishes to express those beliefs at work or in public office.
“LGBT ideology fuelled by Stonewall activists has captured institutions to such an extent that free speech and Christian freedoms have been intimidated into silenced.
“Maureen is a courageous woman who has been treated appallingly for having the guts to declare her belief that marriage between a man and a woman is best for children and our society.
“We stand shoulder to shoulder with her as she seeks justice.”
Background
On 20 April 2022, Miss Martin was summoned to a meeting with HR where she was told three complaints had been made against her for ‘hate speech’.
One complaint said: ‘Does she still work for L&Q? Many of the residents here are horrified looking at her twitter account. She should not have any influence upon the lives of residents as she has some hateful views.’
Another complaint described Miss Martin as a ‘bigoted moron’ and said: ‘Holding anti-Lgbtq views is clearly a barrier to her being able to carry out her job to a satisfactory professional standard. Cooperative House is home to many LGBTQ people, and it should be a minimum requirement for all L&Q staff to view them as equals.’
The third complaint called for Miss Martin to ‘actively participate in anti-oppressive training and for disciplinary action to be taken to address her statements.’
As well as complaining about her manifesto, one complainant also flagged concern about Miss Martin’s criticism of male athletes identifying as transgender taking part in women’s sport.
In an investigation meeting the following day, Miss Martin was told that her tweets and her manifesto were ‘homophobic, had breached L&Q’s social media policy and had potentially brought the company into disrepute.’
Interrogated about the contents of her manifesto leaflet and her Christian beliefs on same sex marriage, Miss Martin said to L&Q’s HR bosses: ‘This is freedom of speech. What’s the point in being allowed freedom of speech if you can’t have it?’
In response, the investigating office simply said: ‘You’ve raised your views on same-sex marriage and children’s upbringing.’
Asked about her beliefs on same-sex marriage, Miss Martin said she had nothing to hide and said: ‘I’m a Christian. It’s just my preference that a marriage be between a man and a woman. My view doesn’t affect my job in any way and hasn’t done since 2007. I’ve had no complaints from people of other sexual orientations or colleagues. I’ve never displayed or raised homophobic opinions in any form in my job.’
Miss Martin said that she had not posted her manifesto on Twitter but was told by the investigating officer that: ‘someone has posted your leaflet on Twitter and tagged you in it.’
Miss Martin was told that putting her photo on the leaflet easily linked her views to her employer, despite L&Q not being mentioned in the manifesto or on her Twitter account.
The investigating officer then said: ‘I don’t dispute that you’re entitled to your views. I completely agree that your views are your views. However, to air them so publicly when you’re clearly linked to L&Q, can you see how that could bring L&Q into disrepute? You have your photo on your leaflet which is clearly linked to L&Q.
In response, Miss Martin said: ‘I’ve been doing this for a long time with my own personal views. The complainants put it on Twitter. It was their plan to cause this.’
HR bosses then asked her if she could understand why people were upset and she said:
‘Of course. But that’s what freedom of speech is. People can disagree. That’s what it is all about. I might not like what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it. I know people will be upset. But I can’t contain my views in case it causes upset. We either have freedom of speech or we don’t. I’m not always happy with what others say. I appreciate my views can cause upset; but it is not a hate speech. I’m expressing my opinion based on fact. They disagree and they have a right to do so.’
Quizzed about a tweet which asked a question as to why women were not competing in men’s sport, Miss Martin said: ‘I was asking, if men who claim to be women can compete in women sports, if we’re all the same, should women also be competing in men’s sports?’
Miss Martin was then asked if she would still stand for the mayorship in Lewisham and she said she would.
She was then accused of failing to declare political activity and a conflict of interest with L&Q’s policies stating that staff: ‘must not engage in any political or campaigning activity that might compromise the position of L&Q.’
At the latest, in January 2022, Miss Martin had declared her role with the CPA and in 2019 had her nomination papers for the mayoral candidacy in Lewisham signed by her then manager, who passed no comment on her being a candidate. Miss Martin insists that she was unaware at all times of any obligation on her part to discuss her candidacy with management.
Immediately following the meeting, however, she was suspended until May 4th which hindered her from campaigning in the local elections.
The letter said she had been suspended for ‘discrimination via homophobic tweets posted on Twitter’ and bringing the company into disrepute.
An investigation and full disciplinary hearing followed, and Miss Martin was dismissed for gross misconduct. In the dismissal letter from L&Q’s Director of Strategy and Planning, it said Miss Martin’s tweets and beliefs could be:
“perceived to be discriminatory, hurtful and offensive views towards members of the LGBTQ+ community, non-traditional families, and abortion.”
Furthermore, the letter stated: ‘I fully recognise your right to your own religious beliefs. However, as stated already, this disciplinary is not about your religious belief. It is about the manifestation of your views in relation to sexual orientation and same sex marriages on social media. Further, whilst I agree that your sharing of your views were not aimed at any member of staff, resident or person specifically to constitute direct discrimination, I do consider that you chose to express your views in an inappropriate manner, and in doing so your views can reasonably be perceived as discriminatory. On this basis it is therefore reasonable to conclude that they will have caused upset, hurt and offence. In addition, in doing so, I conclude that you compromised the position of L&Q as an organisation that upholds inclusivity as one of its foundational values, and as such, the way in which you shared your views has brought L&Q’s reputation into disrepute.’
+ Christian Concern, 70 Wimpole Street, London W1G 8AX, England, 020 7935 1488, Contact Page
[3] Archie Battersbee: Judge Forces Removal of Life Support against Parent Wishes
A High Court judge has today ruled that a London hospital can remove the life support of 12-year-old, Archie Battersbee, against his parents’ wishes.
Archie’s parents, Hollie Dance, 46, and father, Paul Battersbee, from Southend-On-Sea, have been fighting a legal battle since their son was found unconscious with a ligature around his neck in what is believed to be a tragic accident in April.
Handing down the judgment today (15 July), Mr Justice Hayden ruled that it is in Archie’s ‘best interests’ for life-support to be removed.
He said: “Treatment is futile, it compromises Archie’s dignity…and serves only to protract his death rather than prolong his life.”
Archie’s parents, Hollie Dance, 46, and father, Paul Battersbee, from Southend-On-Sea, have been fighting a legal battle since their son was found unconscious with a ligature around his neck in what is believed to be a tragic accident in April.
Archie’s family will now seek permission to appeal.
Following the ruling, Archie’s mother Hollie Dance said in a statement:
“This ruling is a crushing blow to Archie and his family. With all due respect to Mr Justice Hayden, it is not in Archie’s best interests to die.
“Planned death” is another name for euthanasia, which is illegal in this country.
“The ‘planned’ removal of the ventilator is definitely the worst thing that may happen from my point of view. I cannot see how this is in any way dignified.
“We disagree with the idea of dignity in death. Enforcing it on us and hastening his death for that purpose is profoundly cruel.
“It is for God to decide what should happen to Archie, including if, when and how he should die.
“As long as Archie is fighting for his life, I cannot betray him. Until Archie gives up, I won’t give up.
“I am living every parent’s worst nightmare. There must be change in the NHS and in the court system before another family has to go through what we have.
“We will be appealing this ruling and we ask for your prayers and support.”
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: “This is another devastating blow for the family and for Archie. Sadly, however, this is what we have come to expect from the courts in end-of-life cases.
“What Archie’s case has shown is that systematic reform is needed to protect the vulnerable and their families in end-of-life matters. Parents of vulnerable and critically ill children are being put through the mill at the most traumatic moments in their lives when what they need is compassion, support and respect from the NHS and the legal system.
“Behind the back of Parliament and the public, Courts seem to have developed a concept of ‘dying with dignity’ which amounts to euthanasia in all but name.
“These sensitive ethical issues should be debated and determined in the democratic Parliament, not by judicial activists.
“Life is the most precious gift that we have.
“Anyone following this story over the past few months will have seen what it takes to challenge the will of hospital bosses once they have decided life support should be removed.
“This family have fought courageously to get to this point in taking a stand for Archie’s life. We continue to stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they appeal this ruling.”
‘Best interests’
On Monday, legal arguments were renewed at the High Court following the families’ successful appeal over a previous high court ruling which said Archie’s life-support should be removed.
Archie’s parents, Hollie Dance, 46, and father, Paul Battersbee, from Southend-On-Sea, have been fighting a legal battle since their son was found unconscious with a ligature around his neck in what is believed to be a tragic accident in April.
Doctors, who cannot be identified because of reporting restrictions imposed by the Court, have asked the Family Division of the High Court to rule that it is in Archie’s “best interests” for life support to be removed, resulting in immediate death.
Mr Justice Hayden has presided over a series similar cases involving critically ill children and adults. He is best known for presiding over the 2018 case of 1-year-old Alfie Evans, where he ruled it was in Alfie’s best interests to remove life support and prohibited his parents from taking him to an Italian hospital which was prepared to provide treatment.
Mother’s testimony
At the hearing this Monday, Hollie Dance spoke about the immense pressure the family has been under having to defend and fight for Archie’s life in court and the impact it has had on her.
In response to the argument put forward by the hospital that a ‘planned’ death for Archie would be more ‘dignified’ and in his ‘best interests’, Hollie said:
“I am going to stay with Archie in Hospital for as long as it takes. The doctors predict that in a near future, Archie will have a multiple organ failure which will lead to cardiac arrest. If that happens, I am likely to be in the room. I find that scenario much more acceptable than the ‘planned death’ which they propose. I would accept this as God’s decision. The ‘planned’ removal of the ventilator is definitely the worst thing that may happen from my point of view. I cannot see how this is in any way dignified.”
Speaking about Archie’s Christian faith, which she believes would mean Archie would not want a planned death, Hollie said:
“Archie was asking me to get him baptised over a few years before his accident, particularly after he started watching a lot of box fights on TV. Many boxers pray for protection when they go into the ring. The more and more fights he’d watch with his brother, the more he would be nagging me to get him baptised. Every time we drove past St Mary’s Church, he shouted out his most predictable line without fail, ‘Mum when can we go and be christened in there’.”
Therefore, she argued that Archie: “Would feel it is only for God to come and take him out of this world when the time is right for that. Until that time, Archie would want to remain with me and the rest of the family, even without knowing that himself.”
Archie and the whole family have subsequently been baptised in the hospital.
She also cited Archie’s mentality and approach to sport saying that in any situation, including this, he would want to do everything he could ‘to prove himself’ and to fight to overcome the situation he is in.
‘I won’t leave you mum’
Hollie recalled a past conversation and debate she had with Archie and his older brother, Tom, over whether they would want life-support removed if they were ever in such a scenario.
His brother said he would want it removed as he wouldn’t be able to do anything, but Archie is reported to have said:
“I wouldn’t care about that, as long as I am there and I am with Mum. I won’t leave you Mum, don’t worry”.
Hollie added: “As long as he is fighting for his life, I cannot betray him, whether or not there is a realistic hope. I say that because I am his mother, but this is also a matter or human decency. This is why I am upset and offended when I am told by various people in authority that it is time to give up.”
In her witness statement, Hollie also relayed her alarm that a Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) has been placed on Archie without the family’s consent.
During proceedings, Archie’s father, Paul Batersbee, took to the stand for the first time. When asked by Justice Hayden if his son would want to be kept on life-support, he replied: ‘Definitely, he is a proper mummies boy and he would not want to leave her.’
Mr Battersbee said: “Archie is a God-fearing boy. When he was going into fights at MMA, he would pray for protection, and then leave it to God to take care of him. Archie has a very close relationship both with me and his mother, and with both parts of the family. If he could decide for himself, I think he would want to be kept alive for as long as it takes for God to make a decision about him. He would not want to leave us before he has to, or to cause us additional grief by dying in a way which is not acceptable for us.”
‘Nothing more traumatic than planned death’
A senior doctor, who cannot be identified because of the reporting restrictions imposed by the Court, however, said that the doctors felt a “planned death” is necessary to protect Archie’s dignity.
She explained that if his life support continues, he is likely eventually to die from infection, and such a death would be “unpredictable, chaotic in nature, and undignified”.
Ian Wise QC cross-examined the doctor on behalf of the Parents and said: “Very many people in intensive care die an unplanned death”.
The doctor replied: “Unplanned deaths do happen, but they are actually quite rare. That is not something we aspire to – when we can, we much prefer controlled final few moments.
“We always try our very best, to make that death as dignified as possible, as controlled as we can.”
She added: “The manner in which withdrawal takes place is very well thought through”.
“The reason why we generally remove endocranial tube and stop ventilation is that this manner of death is a predictable one, it takes at most a few hours.”
Martin Westgate QC, for the Trust, presented a detailed plan for the removal of life support from Archie, and said: “It is a terrible choice but the Trust believes it is in Archie’s best interests”.
He added: “This is about Archie’s best interests and those are not for bargaining”.
Ian Wise QC told the Court that Archie’s mother accepts that “save for a possibility of God’s miracle, he cannot make a full recovery”.
Mr Wise then said: “Regardless, in the meantime Archie has a life worth living”.
As Archie’s mother gave evidence, Mr Justice Hayden observed: “He is incredibly handsome. Nobody seeing his photographs can fail to see that”.
The Judge asked the mother: “I wonder if something which is planned might offer him greater dignity. And you might have a more positive experience. Can you see?”
Mrs Dance replied: “I can. I disagree with you. Nothing can be more traumatic than seeing a planned death.”
‘Sanctity of life’
In closing submissions, Mr Wise said:
“We have heard from doctors and from the Guardian about what they think is in Archie’s best interests. Their views are very welcome and very interesting, but those views do not anchor themselves in the fundamental common law principle of sanctity of life.”
“Dignity can be seen by one person very differently from the other – it is what the beholder sees. In a case where issues are so profound, a finger in the wind is not good enough.”
“Surely the views of Archie and his Father and Mother should carry more weight than the views of those who are, with respect, only passing through Archie’s life.”
+ Christian Concern, 70 Wimpole Street, London W1G 8AX, England, 020 7935 1488, Contact Page
[4] Abortion of Black Babies Has Destroyed the Equivalent of the Entire Population of Blacks in 1960
The following is excerpted from “Abortion’s twisted logic of racism,” Washington Examiner, Feb. 28, 2020: “While many positive accomplishments by African Americans are now brought to our
attention every February [during Black History Month], there are those who exploit this annual event to further their own political agenda, which is actually counter to the historical advancement of blacks in American history. Among them is Planned Parenthood. The nation’s largest abortion provider has done a masterful job of creating a false impression that its programs somehow benefit the black community. … Abortion in America has contributed to the greatest decline in the black population since the first black slaves arrived in the Americas in the 1600s. According to U.S. census data, there were 18,871,831 black American citizens in 1960. Since Roe v. Wade legalized abortion in 1973, abortion has killed an estimated 20 million black babies–more than the entire black population of 1960. How does this
benefit the black community? … Claims that the pro-life community is a bunch of white supremacists are completely baseless. Such calumny cannot erase the truth that abortion has been used to control the black birth rate, and
Planned Parenthood has led that charge. … Only in a world of twisted logic could organizations and individuals working tirelessly to save black lives from abortion be called ‘racist’ for their efforts.”
+ Way of Life Literature, Post Office Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
[5] More Black Babies Aborted in New York City in 2016 Than Born
The following is excerpted from “More Black babies are aborted,” LiveAction.org, Feb. 16, 2020: “The most recent data available shockingly reveals that in 2016, more Black babies were killed by abortion than were born in New York City. The data also shows that in 2016, Black abortions
accounted for nearly forty percent (38.7 percent) of all abortions in NYC. These alarming statistics reveal how abortion is decimating the Black community and is also hurting other minority groups. Out of 60,000 (59,854) total abortions reported in NYC, nearly sixty-seven percent (66.7 percent) were committed on minority Black (23,209) and Hispanic women (16,718), leaving some to speculate that there is a targeted eugenics agenda at work.”
+ Way of Life Literature, Post Office Box 610368, Port Huron, Michigan 48061, 519-652-2619, fbns@wayoflife.org
Additional Articles of Interest
– Stunning Official Canadian Data Show Vaccines Now Raise the Risk of Death from Covid
– The Church of Pfizer: Washington DC Promotes ‘Faith in Vaccine’ Initiative
– STUDY: Natural Immunity to Covid Never Wanes, But Fully Jabbed Are Developing AIDS
– Thousands of Non-COVID Excess Deaths in the UK Likely Caused by COVID-19 Vaccines
– WHO Recommends Masks Again, Preps World for Another Global Lockdown in Fall
– Alert: New York State Sets Dangerous Precedent for Draconian Quarantine Regulations
– Doctor Proposes Opening Ocean-Borne Abortion Clinic in Gulf of Mexico to Keep Baby Killing Afloat
Comments are closed for this Article !