A professor of neurophysiology in Sweden is being investigated by his university for teaching that the differences between male and female behaviour sometimes has a natural basis rather than being fully explained by factors like upbringing.
According to the Sweden-based Academic Rights Watch, Prof. Germund Hesslow, has taught a course for years on “Heritage and Environment” in the Lund University medical program. In that course, he has addressed such topics as biological gender differences.
The watchdog organisation reports that Hesslow would sometimes be questioned by students who dislike that his teaching is not based on “the gender scientific approach adopted in politics.” Hesslow maintains that gender is not entirely socially constructed because empirical research has found that there are statistical gender differences in behavior that are biologically based.
He was asked by school administrators this month to apologize after his remarks drew the ire of feminist students.
In a statement emailed to The Christian Post about Hesslow’s claims, Lund University’s international press officer, Lotte Billing, said there has been criticism levelled against a lecture entitled ‘Nature, nurture and the biology of sex differences’ given at the medical program at Lund University. She confirmed that, ‘Lund University is currently investigating if the specific lecture was offensive in any way’.
Religious people are more tolerant of different viewpoints than atheists, according to just published research.
A study of 788 people in the UK, France and Spain concluded that atheists and agnostics think of themselves as more open-minded than those with faith, but are actually less tolerant of differing opinions and ideas. Religious believers “seem to better perceive and integrate diverging perspectives”, according to psychology researchers at the University of Louvain (UCL), Belgium’s largest French-speaking university.
Filip Uzarevic, who co-wrote the paper, admitted his surprise at the finding that, “when it came to subtly measured inclination to integrate views that were diverging and contrary to one’s own perspectives, it was the religious who showed more openness.”
Dr Uzarevic’s paper, called “are atheists undogmatic?”, examined mental rigidity in three different groups: atheists and agnostics; Christians; and a group of Buddhists, Muslims, and Jews. The study claims that non-believers measured lower than religious people in “self-reported dogmatism”, but were higher in “subtly-measured intolerance”.
The Minister for Health, Simon Harris, used social media to hit back at pro-life writers who had argued over the weekend that the Government’s proposed abortion bill is too radical and needs to be amended.
Writing on Twitter, Mr Harris said a “few opinion pieces in Sunday papers today attempting to re-run or re-fight referendum on the 8th. We had the Referendum. The people spoke. They had lot of information in advance of making their decision – including a detailed draft law. Time to get on with it and pass the law.”
During the campaign, the head of the Referendum Commission, Judge Isobel Kennedy, stressed the people were voting solely on whether or not to repeal the 8th amendment, and not on the proposed legislation.
Breda O’Brien begun the critique of the Government’s plans in a piece in the Irish Times on Saturday noting that pro-choice campaigners already want to abolish even the meagre restrictions the bill would impose. David Quinn wrote in the Sunday Times that there is far less support for the Govt’s radical legislation than for repealing the Eighth Amendment according to RTE’s extensive exit poll done on the day of the referendum itself. Finally, Wendy Melady wrote in the Sunday Independent that the Government want to supply abortion free of charge but not genuine medical treatments.
As if to prove her point, the Times Ireland on Monday confirmed that this year’s budget will include new expenditure to pay for abortion. The paper also reported that Mr Harris on Saturday will join a March for Choice which is dedicated to calling for ‘free, safe and legal’ abortion provision.
The Government will not change the forthcoming abortion legislation to shorten or abolish the proposed three-day waiting period before an abortion could be executed, the Minister for Health has said. Pro-choice advocates such as Dr Peter Boylan have been saying the waiting period should be eliminated.
Dr Boylan, chairman of the Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and a leading campaigner against the pro-life amendment, had argued before the Oireachtas health committee on Wednesday that the waiting period was “demeaning” to women and “makes presumptions about women’s ability to make decisions about their own healthcare”.
The waiting period is part of the draft legislation published by the Government before the referendum. The Government’s view is that people voted in the referendum having considered the draft legislation, and that it should not be changed at this stage, Mr Harris’s office said.
Mr Harris will also refuse amendments which pro-life TDs have proposed, providing for a conscientious objection for doctors who do not wish to execute an abortion themselves or refer patients to another doctor to execute the procedure.
The failures of both Church and State that caused a ‘legacy of pain and suffering’ in Ireland were discussed by the Taoiseach, Leo Varadkar, and Pope Francis at their recent meeting at Dublin Castle. There is no indication that the Pope raised issues with Mr Varadkar such as the elimination of the right to life of the unborn from the Constitution.
The Taoiseach spoke about the meeting in the Dail on Tuesday, telling Deputy Richard Boyd Barrett that he welcomed Pope Francis “who thanked me for the warm welcome he had received on arrival.” He said that the meeting “provided an opportunity for both of us to discuss a number of issues, though regrettably not in any great depth because of the short duration of the meeting.” He continued: “We spoke of the legacy of pain and suffering caused by the failures of the Church and State in Ireland. We discussed that Ireland is still a country with strong faith but that there is still much to be done to bring about justice and truth and healing for victims and survivors.”
The Taoisach said he also thanked the Pope for his statements on climate change, accepting refugees and international development. They also spoke of Irish missionaries, how they continue their work today, and also about the Pope’s home country of Argentina and the role of Irish missionaries there.
The Taoiseach finished by emphasising that he also used the opportunity during his speech later that day to expand on these issues and to express his strong wish that “words need to be followed up by actions.”
Removing the offence of blasphemy from the Constitution will confirm Ireland’s status as a modern democratic society where free speech is ‘valued’ and multiculturalism is ‘embraced’, Minister for Justice Charlie Flanagan said.
Mr Flanagan was speaking in the Dail as he introduced legislation to allow a referendum take place on the issue on October 26th. He said as long as the offence remained in the Constitution, Ireland would be seen internationally as “a country which keeps company with those who do not share the fundamental values we cherish such as belief in freedom of conscience and expression”.
The House passed the 37th Amendment of the Constitution (Repeal of offence of publication or utterance of blasphemous matter) Bill without a vote and the legislation now goes to the Seanad.
If the referendum is approved by the people, Article 40.6.1°.i will then state: “The publication or utterance of seditious or indecent matter is an offence which shall be punishable in accordance with law.”
Labour TD Sean Sherlock and People Before Profit TD Richard Boyd Barrett questioned the retention of the offences of indecent and seditious matter.
Mr Boyd Barrett said: “One person’s sedition is another person’s completely legitimate criticism of institutions of the State or of society, or of particular laws. And the work of many of the best writers of this country was considered ‘indecent’, including that of James Joyce.”
The Minister said however that sedition and indecent matter were covered by law and it was right to have laws for offences such as the production and distribution of child pornography.
A religious upbringing can profoundly help adolescents navigate the challenges of these years according to research from Harvard’s Chan School of Public Health. The research also found that a religious upbringing contributes to a wide range of health and well-being outcomes later in life.
The study used a large sample of over 5,000 adolescents, followed them up for more than eight years, and controlled for many other variables to try to isolate the effect of religious upbringing. The researchers found that children who were raised in a religious or spiritual environment were subsequently better protected from the greatest dangers of adolescence.
For example, those who attended religious services regularly were subsequently 12% less likely to have high depressive symptoms and 33% less likely to use illicit drugs.
Those who prayed or meditated frequently were 30% less likely to start having sex at a young age and 40% less likely to subsequently have a sexually transmitted infection
Moreover, a religious upbringing also contributed towards to a number of positive outcomes as well, such greater happiness, more volunteering in the community, a greater sense of mission and purpose, and higher levels of forgiveness.
Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison will enact “preventative regulation and legislation” to shield freedom of religion from future threats.
In a television interview with Sky News on Monday night, Mr Morrison indicated he was displeased with the “trajectory” of freedom of speech and freedom of religion over the past decade.
Asked to identify specific areas that needed protection, the PM said the Christian school to which he sent his children should be able to hire and fire staff as it pleased, and deliver education in line with his expectations as a Christian parent.
He also said Australians should be free to take up positions on the boards of public companies — or as partners in a law firm — regardless of whether their religious beliefs conflicted with the policies of that company.
“Why should you be denied a directorship or a partnership in a law firm or accountancy firm just because you happen to have expressed on Facebook or somewhere a particular religious belief?” Mr Morrison asked.
The country’s first Pentecostal Prime Minister has inherited from his predecessor a review of Australia’s laws on “religious freedom” which was undertaken by former Liberal attorney-general Philip Ruddock and handed to the government in May.
An increasing number of Christian pastors and community leaders have signed a joint declaration condemning an ongoing, violent persecution of Christians in China by the State authorities. The initial statement, released at the end of August, was signed by 19 people, but many more have risked further persecution by adding their name to the list which stands at 279 now.
In September, 2017, the State Council issued a decree on the administration of religious affairs, and began implementing them in February, 2018. Since then, Christian churches have suffered varying degrees of persecution, contempt, and hostility from government departments during public worship and religious practices, including measures that “attempt to alter and distort the Christian faith,” the statement says.
“Some of these violent actions are unprecedented since the end of the Cultural Revolution. These include demolishing crosses on church buildings, violently removing expressions of faith like crosses and couplets hanging on Christians’ homes, forcing and threatening churches to join religious organisations controlled by the government, forcing churches to hang the national flag or to sing secular songs praising the State and political parties, banning the children of Christians from entering churches and receiving religious education, and depriving churches and believers of the right to gather freely.”
The statement calls these actions unjust and an abuse of government power as they infringe on the human freedoms of religion and conscience and violate the universal rule of law. They then pledge to obey God, rather than man, even if the cost is martyrdom.
The State’s healthcare watchdog has criticised two care homes for failing to provide elderly residents with adequate voting arrangements during May’s abortion referendum. All care home facilities are required to ensure that every resident is able to use their right to vote in all elections and referendums but the Health Information and Quality Authority (Hiqa) found that the Croft nursing home in Inchicore, Dublin, and Cramers Court nursing home in Belgooly, Co Cork, had failed to do so. By this omission, the care homes effectively disenfranchised the votes of their residents. The two homes in question were found to be in breach of the law when they were subjected to unannounced inspections. It is not known how many other care homes may have similarly failed to provide voting arrangements for their elderly residents.
The incidents contrast with the Government’s major efforts to ensure that students would be given every opportunity and help to vote as they were expected to support the referendum.
Mervyn Taylor, executive director of Sage Advocacy, said: “People can forget that care isn’t just about the physical care but also about people’s rights as citizens.”
