Daily Stormer The Most Censored Publication in History
Sven Longshanks
Daily Stormer
January 20, 2015
There is no more serious crime in modern day Britain than speaking the truth.
Trampling all over the millennia old laws guaranteeing freedom of conscience and freedom of religion, the secret speech-police are always somewhere near, lurking in the shadows and ready to pounce the minute they hear a word of truth anywhere.
Today it happened to a Christian magistrate named Richard Page, who in private and behind closed doors, dared to suggest that it was best for a child to be raised by both a mother and a father.
This heinous crime was reported instantly by his back-stabbing colleagues and has resulted in a suspension of courtroom duties and a dressing down from the Lord Chancellor no less, along with a mandatory course in ‘equality’ and a black mark saying ‘guilty of serious misconduct’ on his record.
The married 68-year-old was told he had broken the oath sworn by all Justices of the Peace (JPs) as well as Labour’s controversial Equality Act, by being guided by his religious views and discriminating against the same-sex adoptive parents.
Last night, critics said the case was another example of how people who hold traditional Christian views feel they have no freedom of speech and find it difficult to hold public office in modern Britain.
Mr Page told The Mail on Sunday: ‘There is tremendous pressure to keep quiet and go along with what is seen to be politically correct.
‘Everyone else seems to be allowed to stand up for their beliefs except for Christians.’ Mr Page was called on to consider an adoption order at a family court last July.
As a lay judge he is not required to be legally qualified and is meant to ‘bring a broad experience of life to the bench’ in making decisions. Because of the controversial secretive nature of such hearings, The Mail on Sunday cannot publish details of the case.
But as is standard in such cases, social workers presented their report on the adoption case in the courtroom then Mr Page went into a separate meeting room with fellow magistrates to discuss whether or not to approve the placement order with the prospective parents.
It was at that point, behind closed doors, that Mr Page said he raised several questions about whether or not the adoption was appropriate, and also mentioned his view as a Christian that it would be better for the child to be raised by a mother and a father rather than the prospective parents who were two men.
‘I think there is something about a man, a woman and a baby, that it’s natural and therefore the others are not. That is the comment that I made,’ he said.
‘Therefore, since my task as a magistrate is to do the best for the child, my feeling was, quite reasonably, that a man and a woman would be better.’
Mr Page said: ‘What I was staggered by was that they were saying I was a Christian and therefore I was prejudiced. They were far more prejudiced in their complaint than I was in what I said.’
Mr Page said he had thought the discussion was just like any other that happens between magistrates when they disagree on a case and have to use their judgment to make a decision.
‘Why do you have magistrates if there isn’t a different view that they can have? We all have views and that’s what you have to bring to decision-making, and mine are Christian views.’
He accepted his decision was coloured by his religious philosophy but insisted: ‘That’s allowed because that’s what we’re here for.
‘Our job is to do what’s best for that child and that must be something to do with the magistrate’s views rather than just ticking the box.’
Mr Page was brought before a local conduct panel, where he was told he had broken the judicial oath, which requires magistrates to ‘do right to all manner of people’, ‘without fear or favour, affection or ill will’.
But he pointed out the oath also includes the words ‘so help me God’, and therefore he was abiding by the oath as he was doing the best for the child with the help of God.
…
Mr Page is the latest in a series of Christians who have either been disciplined or forced out of their jobs for expressing their views publicly.
Andrea Williams, head of the pressure group Christian Concern that has advised Mr Page, added: ‘There’s no understanding that he could be acting out of compassion for a child. They just think that he’s prejudiced and that people who hold this view should not be in public office.
‘We need more people like Mr Page in public life. Why should he, after all these years of service, suddenly have some kind of mark on his record for believing a child should live with a mother and father?
‘Christians have to decide if they want to stay silent, say nothing, because if they reveal what they think and say supposedly controversial things such as children need a mum and a dad, at that point they can find themselves in trouble with their employers and professional bodies.’
