Thursday, June 11, 2026
.jpg)
UK Abortion Culture.
Male silence has helped shape UK abortion culture.
(Photo: Getty/iStock)A bioethicist has warned that the absence, silence and failure of men have played a major role in the growth of abortion culture, arguing that men must recover their responsibility as fathers, protectors and witnesses to the dignity of life.
Delivering the opening keynote address at the March for Life UK Men’s Conference, Dr Anthony McCarthy said that discussions around abortion often overlook the role of men, despite the profound impact fathers can have both before and after a pregnancy.
“In the whole abortion debate, there’s a lot of silence,” he said. “Men and abortion is an area that is even more silenced than many of the other areas connected with women and abortion, which are silenced.”
Dr McCarthy, founder and director of Bios Centre, argued that modern abortion culture has been shaped not only by political and legal changes, but also by a deeper cultural shift that separates sex from commitment, fatherhood and family responsibility.
Dr McCarthy argued that the family should be viewed not simply as a private arrangement between individuals, but as a foundational institution that serves the common good.
“What is served is not only an individual woman and child, but a whole institution of which we are a part, the institution known as the family,” he said.
He warned that modern society increasingly treats marriage and family life as contractual relationships between autonomous individuals rather than as the natural basis of society.
“One advantage of taking the family structure seriously is that as a model for society, it protects against the extremes of individualism and collectivism through its attention to the person,” he said.
Dr McCarthy said that in a culture shaped by individual autonomy, pregnancy is often treated as a disruption rather than the natural fruit of love, commitment and self-giving.
He continued, “Unfortunately, we live in a culture influenced by political theories which have attempted to reshape the family according to an idea that the basic unit of society is something called a free, rational individual.
“The move to reimagine the family in individualized terms and reshape marriage, now genderless, in terms of a readily dissolved contract, reveals how political theory has often seen the family as a problem, something to be demystified or undermined.
“The idea that the family is the natural unit of society to which other human associations are added has often given way to the idea that the family is a contractual relationship of free, rational beings which occupies no special position in a modern, liberal society.”
A major theme of his address was a critique of modern ideas of freedom that prioritise individual choice above relationships, responsibilities and moral obligations.
Drawing on the writings of St Augustine, he argued that genuine freedom requires self-control and virtue rather than the unrestricted pursuit of personal desires.
He suggested that contemporary culture increasingly treats emotions such as shame and guilt as obstacles to self-realisation, while virtues such as chastity are often viewed negatively.
Dr McCarthy challenged cultural narratives that present abortion simply as a matter of choice, saying that such language can obscure pressure, coercion and abandonment.
He pointed to research suggesting that many women face pressure to abort from partners or others around them and warned that male silence can itself leave women feeling unsupported.
“The threat of abandonment or even coldness on the part of the father may be enough to change her mind,” he said.
He added that some men may believe they are helping by deferring entirely to the woman’s decision but may unintentionally communicate a lack of support for having the child.
Dr McCarthy also questioned arguments that abortion is necessary to secure equality between men and women.
He argued that such reasoning often assumes a male model of freedom, one defined by detachment from the consequences of sexual activity.
According to Dr McCarthy, women are increasingly expected to overcome or suppress the very biological realities that distinguish them from men in order to achieve equality.
“To accept such a picture is effectively to encourage the manifest injustice women experience who do look for support in their pregnancy,” he said.
Dr McCarthy said men can also experience grief, guilt and trauma after abortion, though this is often socially unrecognised.
He described this as “disenfranchised grief”, saying men are frequently expected to remain silent before an abortion and show no emotional response after it.
“A father is a father forever, even of a dead unborn child,” he said, quoting one commentator.
He argued that society places contradictory expectations on fathers.
“If his child is allowed to live … he will be expected to step up to the plate and become a loving, caring and responsible father,” Dr McCarthy said. “If, on the other hand, it is decided that his child is to be destroyed, he should be able to go about his life as if nothing had happened.”
Towards the conclusion of his address, McCarthy criticised what he described as an overly narrow focus on autonomy within abortion debates.
He argued that decisions cannot be understood in isolation from their consequences for mothers, fathers and unborn children.
“If we value choices without reference to the good or bad things that might be chosen, then it becomes impossible to see why choice should be so valuable in the first place,” he said.
“Nothing could be more patronising to both men and women than to suggest that the most important thing about the abortion decision is autonomy and not what that decision truly involves.”
He concluded by calling for a renewed recognition of the real people involved in abortion decisions: mothers, fathers and unborn children.
“By reminding ourselves of the flesh and blood human beings involved, be they mothers, fathers, or unborn children, and what parenthood demands, we welcome back reality into this area of life,” he said.
The conference also heard from John Deighan, chief executive of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, who said that fathers have a vital role in forming children who can resist cultural messages that undermine the dignity of human life.
He urged parents to recognise the power of media, entertainment and slogans in shaping young people’s moral instincts.
“There is a tide trying to take them in a particular direction,” he said. “So, you need to realise: how does that tide work and how am I going to resist it?”
Deighan said fathers must be credible witnesses in the home, not merely people who repeat moral rules.
“Children can sense if there’s a lack of authenticity,” he said. “You need to be authentic in your witness.”
He encouraged fathers to teach their children that every human being has dignity, warning that societies throughout history have justified grave injustices by treating some people as less than fully human.
Deighan further stressed the importance of protecting childhood innocence and helping children understand relationships and sexuality in ways that are appropriate to their stage of development.
He argued that much of modern culture exposes children to sexualised ideas and imagery at an early age, and encouraged parents to approach such conversations with sensitivity and care.
The SPUC chief said the pro-life cause is not only a political struggle but also a spiritual one that requires fathers to cultivate a serious spiritual life and to model integrity, commitment and respect within their families.
“We’re in the middle of a spiritual battle,” he said. “If you’re going to challenge that, then you’ve got a fight on your hands.”
A Sad Departure.
Tributes paid to Operation Mobilisation co-founder Dale Rhoton
Tributes have been paid to Dale Rhoton, one of the co-founders of international mission organisation Operation Mobilisation (OM), after his death at the age of 88.
Release International at Keswick.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wednesday, June 10, 2026
Appalling Attack in Belfast: Brave Rescuer Attacks Perpetrator and Saves Victim's Life.
Must we assume that he will now be arrested and charged for his behaviour? In our sick, leftist world - it really is a genuine possibility.
It may sound an absurd question - but, sadly, this is the nature of 'justice' in this nation today. The obvious praise and medal that he deserves may not happen.
Sadly - YES.
Is there a two-tier Britain?
(Photo: Getty/iStock)The video footage was horrific - a man telling a police officer who was in the process of arresting him that he could not breath. The killing of George Floyd in 2020 sparked the biggest protests in US history and condemnation throughout the world. And then in an uncanny parallel last December in the UK an 18-year-old student, Henry Novak, was being arrested by police for racism – after his accuser had stabbed him several times.
Last week the video footage of his arrest was released and if anything, was even more horrific than the George Floyd video. Henry told the police that he had been stabbed and that he couldn’t breathe. He said this at least seven times. His murderer stepped in and told the police that he was the one who had been assaulted and racially abused. The response to Henry’s claim of being stabbed was chilling. One officer stated, “I don’t think you have mate.” Someone else could be heard saying, “He hasn’t been stabbed.” Another police officer says that they need to check. Police handcuffed Henry as he was lying bleeding to death and the last thing he heard was them reading him his rights.
It is an astonishing video. And one that I suspect will be a key image of this decade. The responses to it have been deeply revealing.
The family
Firstly the response of Henry’s family was deeply moving. They spoke so well of their grief, of their blaming the killer Digwa and asking people not to politicise the murder, or to blame the Sikh community. Would that their plea be heard. Also, their plea for the government to deal with knife crime.
The killer and his family
It astounded me that the killer filmed the murder and Novak as he was dying. It is voyeurism of the sickest kind. Furthermore, his mother was arrested and found guilty of assisting an offender by removing and concealing the murder weapon.
The Sikh community
The Sikh community has acted responsibly and with clarity. They called the murder “a horrific and senseless crime with no excuses” and “a disgrace to the Sikh community”. It is unspeakably sad and senseless that some have sought to blame the whole Sikh community, all 535,000 of them – who in general have shown themselves to be a law-abiding and well-integrated part of multi-cultural Britain.
The police
There is no doubt that most police forces have been taken over by a DEI ideology which creates the very opposite of diversity, equality and inclusion. Many police officers have testified how they feel that their training pressurises them into particular prejudices. There is clearly two-tier policing.
The police are now schooled in anti-racism ideology – which is itself racist and which certainly does not lead to all people being treated the same, despite the colour of their skin. For example, the National Police Chiefs Council’s anti-racism policy explicitly disavows treating all people as being the same:
“Our commitment to racial equity means producing equality of policing outcomes for people from different ethnic groups by responding to individuals and communities according to their specific needs, circumstances and experiences, with understanding that these will be racialised and with the aim of reducing harm.
“It does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality).”
How this two-tier policing works was seen in another case where Luke Salmons was suspended by North Yorkshire Police for daring to question Islam in a training day on race, religion and culture. Undoubtedly no one would suffer the same treatment for expressing the same doubts about Christianity.
The politicians
The hypocrisy has been stunning. Ed Davey and Keir Starmer have been making solemn pronouncements about not politicising the tragedy. They blamed Farage for speaking about ‘anger’. Yet they were lightning quick in politicising the George Floyd tragedy. Starmer said on 3 June 2020 in Parliament: “May I start by expressing shock and anger at the death of George Floyd? This has shone a light on racism and hatred experienced by many in the US and beyond. I am surprised the Prime Minister has not said anything about this yet, but I hope that the next time he speaks to President Trump he will convey to him the UK’s abhorrence about his response to the events.” Yet this week he has solemnly been proclaiming that those who ask for anger are divisive.
I think of the Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood who condemned the protests in Southampton. Yet she was on a pro-Palestinian protest that forced a supermarket to close. If angry protests are permitted or excused in some circumstances but not others, then we do have two-tier justice.
Or the London Mayor Sadiq Khan, who said that the death of Novak should not be used for engaging in political disputes. This is the same mayor who talked about how the death of Floyd has “rightly ignited fury and anguish, not just in the US but around the world”.
Starmer complained about the US Vice President JD Vance “interfering” in UK politics by making a statement. Yet in October 2024 the Labour party sent more than 100 volunteers to work with the Kamala Harris campaign.
But there are also politicians on the right who demonstrate a degree of hypocrisy. Having argued that the death of George Floyd should not have been politicised, they cannot legitimately argue that the death of Henry Novak should.
It is also fair to point out when politicians strike the right tone. For example, Kemi Badenoch has been impressive (despite being misquoted by a Reform attack campaign as saying that ‘white lives don’t matter’. She had actually said that all lives matter). Her refusal to use Prime Minister’s Question time in Parliament to score political points on the issue was wise and measured.
The media
The contrast in coverage by the BBC and others of the two cases is sharp and clear. The BBC was even forced to apologise to Nigel Farage for misquoting him. They quoted him several times as saying that people should respond to the killing with ‘white, cold rage’. What he actually said was ‘pure, cold rage’ which, as he explained, meant not ‘hot rage’ i.e. not with rioting or violence.
Much of the media regarded chanting ‘I can’t breathe’ at the Southampton demonstration as crass and ignorant. But this was the same media who applauded the crowds chanting ‘I can’t breathe’ at the BLM protests.
Consider how the BBC reported the Southampton riots on June 2, 2026 – “violent, violent disorder, community shocked by violence”. Eleven police officers were hurt. Contrast that with the reporting of the BLM riots in London on June 8, 2020. Despite 27 officers being hurt the BBC’s description was that “the protests were largely peaceful”. This is what we call two-tier reporting.
The University of Southampton
After the Floyd killing in the US, Southampton University set up scholarships for black students only. Other than express shock and horror at the killing of their own student, it is unlikely that they will do anything else in memory of Henry Nowak. Why? It’s two-tier diversity.
The Church
Church leaders in the UK have called for prayer, peace and rejecting rage. But when George Floyd died the response was somewhat different – many called for racial justice and protest, and endorsed the violent protests of the Black Lives Matter movement.
One leading evangelical has argued that the video cam footage of Nowak’s final moments showed that the police action was understandable in the light of the phone call they had received and that it did not constitute that there is an overall problem with policing. I have no doubt whatsoever that this same evangelical would be claiming the opposite if this was a young Asian boy who had been left to bleed to death by the police. Two-tier Christian commentary, reflecting the culture, is alive and well.
Two-tier is another way of saying unjust. The UK has moved towards a two-tier system, if we are not already there. There are so many examples of this. Just last year, the Sentencing Council tried to push through guidelines that would have instructed judges to give ethnic minorities more lenient treatment than whites. Thankfully this was stopped by the government, but the fact that our best legal minds could think this was justified is chilling.
Two-tier is perhaps best summed up by Konstantin Kisin’s excellent article on what happened, “You will not see Henry’s words stencilled on a mural. No politician will quote them in the Commons. No corporation will change its logo. The same establishment that made four words immortal when spoken by a black man in Minneapolis has met the same four words, spoken by a white boy dying on a Southampton street, with what can only be described as a determined, institutional silence.”
Two-tier occurs when political leaders use the phrase ‘causing division’ for their political opponents, while those who agree with them are expressing the justified anger of a community.
The Bible has an interesting take on all of this. We are not to shop partiality to any group in justice – including the poor. "Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favouritism to the great but judge your neighbour fairly" (Leviticus 19:15).
When we believe in a just God who demands justice for all those made in his image, we have a much more solid basis for a just society. When we abandon God and his Word – and base justice on identitarian politics - we end up with the madness we are seeing in the UK today. It’s not even two-tier justice; it's multi-tier injustice where privileged groups, indoctrinated elites, and the powerful and wealthy combine to create a society where injustice flourishes. Lord, have mercy on us.
David Robertson writes on https://substack.com/@theweeflea
.jpg)
Christian Colleges.
The death of Christian colleges USA: Why campuses are closing and what’s next.
When Trinity Christian College in Palos Heights, Illinois, graduated its final class this past May, my heart sank. Sadly, Trinity is not alone.
Over the past several decades, a growing number of Christian colleges, universities, Bible colleges, and seminaries have either closed their doors, merged with other institutions, significantly downsized, or drifted from the biblical convictions upon which they were founded. Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, long regarded as one of the premier Evangelical seminaries in America, recently graduated its final class in Deerfield, Illinois. Numerous other institutions face uncertain futures as enrollment declines, costs increase, and the cultural landscape becomes increasingly hostile to historic Christianity.
The first two of the schools I attended have already closed. The seminary where I earned my Th.M. and Ph.D. no longer offers the doctoral program through which I was trained. As I reflected on these realities, I found myself asking a troubling question: Who will train the next generation of pastors, missionaries, teachers, biblical scholars, apologists, and Christian leaders?
Certainly, there are economic reasons for what we are witnessing. Many Christian colleges are facing declining enrollment, demographic changes, lower birth rates, rising operational costs, increased competition from online education, and mounting concerns over student debt. Some institutions have struggled with financial management or failed to adapt to changing educational markets. These realities cannot be ignored. Yet economics alone does not explain the broader crisis facing Christian higher education.
Many institutions have also experienced theological drift. In an effort to remain culturally relevant, they have gradually embraced assumptions and ideologies that would have been foreign to their founders. Rather than shaping culture through the truth of Scripture, they increasingly allow culture to shape their interpretation of Scripture. The result is often a subtle but significant departure from biblical authority. What begins as a desire to engage with the culture can eventually become an accommodation to it.
As a black Evangelical, I understand the desire for Christian institutions to reflect the diversity of God's Kingdom. The Church includes believers from every tribe, tongue, people, and nation. Yet diversity of ethnicity and experience must never come at the expense of biblical orthodoxy. Institutions that exist to train Christian leaders must remain committed to the authority, sufficiency, and truthfulness of God's Word. When theological fidelity becomes secondary to cultural acceptance, institutions inevitably lose their identity.
One of the most significant challenges facing Christian institutions today is the influence of Critical Race Theory, identity politics, and other ideas rooted in cultural Marxism. These frameworks often redefine human identity primarily through categories of race, power, oppression, and victimization rather than through humanity's shared creation in the image of God and our common need for redemption through Jesus Christ. Instead of reconciling people through the Gospel, they frequently encourage division, resentment, and competing grievances. Rather than emphasizing our unity in Christ, they encourage believers to view one another through categories of race and power.
In my book, The Heart of Apostasy, I argue that whenever an ideology becomes the lens through which Scripture is interpreted rather than allowing Scripture to interpret culture, the seeds of apostasy have already been planted. The issue is not merely political. It is spiritual. The Church's mission is not to baptize the latest cultural movement but to proclaim the unchanging truth of God's Word. When Christian institutions lose confidence in Scripture's authority, they eventually lose confidence in the very mission they were created to fulfill.
Yet theological drift is only part of the problem. The deeper issue may be that many Christian institutions have forgotten their primary purpose. Christian colleges and seminaries do not exist merely to grant degrees. They exist to make disciples. They exist to prepare men and women to think Christianly, live faithfully, engage culture biblically, and advance the Kingdom of God. Education divorced from discipleship may produce graduates, but it will not produce faithful Christian leaders.
The closing of Trinity Christian College forced me to ask another question: What should come next?
As my wife Jennifer (who holds a Master of Arts degree in Clinical Psychology with an emphasis in Marriage and Family from Moody Theological Seminary) and I reflected on the future of Christian education, we became increasingly convinced that the Church needs more than another traditional college or seminary. While those institutions continue to serve an important role, the challenges facing the Church today require a renewed commitment to worldview formation and discipleship that extends beyond the classroom.
We began envisioning a Biblical Worldview Center dedicated to helping Christians develop and apply a biblical worldview to every sphere of life. What if pastors, educators, elected officials, business leaders, ministry leaders, students, and families could gather for intensive training rooted in Scripture and applied to the challenges of our day? What if biblical literacy, apologetics, discipleship, leadership development, public policy, media engagement, family restoration, economic empowerment, and cultural engagement could all be taught from a distinctly Christian perspective? What if the Church once again became the conscience of the culture rather than its echo?
These questions gave birth to our vision for a Biblical Worldview Center, not merely as a place, but as a movement dedicated to equipping believers to think biblically, live faithfully, and influence culture for Christ.
The goal is not merely education. The goal is transformation. At Freedom's Journal Institute, we have spent years developing what we call the R.I.S.E. PrinciplesTM: Responsible Government, Individual Liberty and Fidelity, Strong Family Values, and Economic Empowerment. These principles are not political slogans. They are applications of biblical truth to the challenges facing our communities, our churches, and our nation.
Responsible Government recognizes that civil authority is ordained by God to reward good and punish evil. Individual Liberty and Fidelity remind us that freedom flourishes only when it is accompanied by personal responsibility, moral character, and faithfulness to God. Strong Family Values affirm that the family is the foundational institution of society and that healthy families are essential to human flourishing. Economic Empowerment acknowledges the biblical dignity of work, stewardship, entrepreneurship, and generational responsibility. Together, these principles provide a framework for understanding how a biblical worldview applies to every area of life.
The crisis facing the Church today is not primarily a lack of information. It is a lack of discipleship. Many Christians know what they believe but struggle to apply those beliefs to culture, economics, education, politics, media, and family life. Others have unknowingly adopted secular assumptions that shape their thinking more than Scripture does. As a result, the Church often reflects the culture more than it influences it.
This is why our broader vision extends beyond a campus. It begins with a diagnosis. We must honestly assess the spiritual condition of both the Church and the culture. It continues with discipleship. Believers must be grounded in Scripture and equipped to think biblically about every sphere of life.
Across America, churches, families, and Christian institutions are struggling to navigate an increasingly secular culture. The need for biblical worldview training has never been greater. Whether through conferences, certificate programs, leadership development, media initiatives, or a dedicated campus, the mission remains the same: to equip believers to engage every area of life under the lordship of Jesus Christ.
The Church cannot afford to ignore the warning these closures represent. The death of a Christian college is never merely the closing of a campus. It is a reminder that every generation must decide whether it will faithfully pass biblical truth to the next generation or allow that inheritance to be lost.
Buildings may close. Institutions may rise and fall. But the mission remains unchanged. The Church does not merely need another college. It needs a renewed commitment to biblical truth, faithful discipleship, and worldview training that prepares believers to serve Christ in every sphere of life.
The next generation is waiting, and the responsibility to equip them belongs to us.
Dr. Eric M. Wallace, author of the new book, The Heart of Apostasy: How The Black Church Abandoned Biblical Authority for Political Ideology--And How to Reclaim It, is a trailblazing scholar, dynamic speaker, and passionate advocate for faith-based conservatism. With a distinguished academic background and an unwavering commitment to biblical truth, Wallace has become a leading voice challenging cultural and political narratives that conflict with a biblical worldview.Wallace holds postgraduate degrees in biblical studies (M.A., ThM, Ph.D.), Wallace is the first African American to earn a Ph.D. in biblical studies from Union-PSCE (now Union Presbyterian Seminary). His scholarship and ministry experience equip him to address today’s most pressing sociopolitical issues through the lens of faith, reason, and historical accuracy. CP.
News From Nepal.
|
|
|
|
Asia Conference.
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
|
Those Who Live By The Sword ...
Notorious Liverpool gangster is stabbed to death in Holland nine years after he 'shot his old friend and Thai wife in their Amsterdam fl...
-
Franklin Graham preached in Glasgow, launches new fund to defend religious freedom in the UK. Staff writer Franklin Graham preaching at ...
-
Nigel Farage’s general election spending will not be investigated by the elections watchdog, it was confirmed. Labour had called on the E...
