Student Ordered to Remove Cross Necklace at California College

Orthodox Christians will also be required to remove our crosses or conceal them, and we will be told we cannot make the Sign of the Cross in public places. We will no longer be allowed to make processions outside of our church buildings as part of our divine services.

These are just the early warning signs. Gird your loins.

Student Ordered to Remove Cross Necklace at California College
Daily Caller via Pravoslavie.ru

An official at Sonoma State University ordered a student working at a freshman orientation fair to remove or hide a cross necklace on two separate occasions. The unnamed official feared that other students could be offended by the two-inch-long symbol of Christianity. The first of the two incidents occurred at the public school in Northern California’s wine country on June 27, reports Fox News. The official, an orientation supervisor, warned Sonoma State student Audrey Jarvis that “the chancellor” enforced a policy against wearing religious items. “The chancellor” is presumably Timothy P. White, the chancellor of the entire 23-school California State University system. According to Hiram Sasser, an attorney representing Jarvis, the supervisor advised the practicing Catholic “that she could not wear her cross necklace because it might offend others, it might make incoming students feel unwelcome.” Jarvis, 19, said she was floored by the explanation. “I was offended because I believe as a Christian woman it is my prerogative to display my faith any way I like so long as it is not harming anyone else,” she told Fox News. “I was very hurt and felt as if the university’s mission statement — which includes tolerance and inclusivity to all — was violated.” On a second occasion, the supervisor ordered Jarvis to conceal the cross under her shirt or get rid of it. That’s when the liberal arts major decided to bail early on the orientation job. Sasser, the director of litigation at the conservative- and Christian-oriented Liberty Institute, calls the supervisor’s actions “obvious religious discrimination” and is seeking an apology. The attorney added that the law is pretty settled in this area. “State employees may wear crosses while they are performing their duties as long as the wearing does not interfere with the employees’ duties or harm the employer’s business interests,” Sasser counseled. Management at Sonoma State, a school known mostly as a laidback hippie haven with a nice library, is apologizing repeatedly and without reservation. “Someone who works here was concerned that the cross might be off-putting to students who are coming to campus for the first time,” confirmed university spokeswoman Susan Kashack. She added that the supervisor’s behavior was “completely wrong.” “It was absolutely an inappropriate action for him to make that request of her,” Kashack added, according to Fox News. “It’s possible that political correctness got out of hand.” Sonoma State President Ruben Arminana is in on the groveling as well. “The president was very upset about it and asked me to contact Miss Jarvis and give a profuse apology,” Kashack said. Kashack noted that school officials have communicated with the unidentified employee who ordered Jarvis to remove the cross necklace. However, she refused to disclose what was said or if he faces any sort of consequences.

Malaysia 'Galloping' towards Islamization, says Prominent Bishop

Threats to close Vatican office as nation takes sharp pro-Islamic turn

UCA News via ICC/Persecution.org

In Malaysia, the tone of the anti-Christian campaign has become shriller. One of the new government’s first moves was to amend the Administration of Islamic Law so that consent from only one parent or guardian was required for a child to be converted to Islam. It drew flak from an array of rights groups, lawyers and politicians, and surprised by the fierce reaction, the bill was withdrawn earlier this month.

Yet it is not over yet. Some see it as an attempt by the government to shore up its conservative Muslim voter base, while others say it is a sign of the continuing Islamization of Malaysia. Other examples abound: the barely veiled threats against the papal nuncio Archbishop Joseph Marino, who has defended the rights of Malaysian Christians to use Allah as the word for God in the Malay language, are cause for concern.

"If he does not retract his statement in seven days, we will have….to ask the prime minister…to close the Vatican office and ask that the ambassador be sent back to the Vatican," said the radical Malay-Muslim supremacy organizations, Peraksa and Jati. Their accusations of an attempted ‘Christianisation’ of Malaysia signals rising tensions between the country’s disparate religious groups.

Around 60 percent of Malaysia’s population considers themselves to be Muslim; just over nine percent are Christian. Conflict between the two groups has been on the rise for several years, since the government in 2009 lifted a ban on the use of “Allah” as a translation for “God” in Malay-language Bibles. The ruling was followed by a series of attacks on Christian worship sites.

And last year, as the country prepared for elections, the government was forced to ditch the name of a seminar on "the threat of Christianity" after it was accused of attempting to stoke anti-Christian sentiment in a bid to win the Muslim vote.

While the debacle over the use of “Allah” can be seen as an issue of dissent between Muslims and Christians, the attempted conversion ruling would have affected all religious minorities in Malaysia. The big question is: what religion should children adhere to if ones parent leaves his or her religion to convert to Islam? There have been several cases in the past few years, where a father – in most cases a Hindu – converted to Islam and subsequently converted the children without having sought the mother’s consent.

The government claims the sole purpose of the bill was to rectify the lack of a legal provision for child conversions at the federal level. However, by attempting to legalize the right of the converted parent to convert the kids to his or her new religion, the government abandoned a cabinet decision made in April 2009. Back then the government agreed that minors were to be bound by the common religion of their parents while they were married, even if one parent later becomes a Muslim.

The prominent Bishop Tan had called the bill “morally and ethically wrong,” unconstitutional, and proof of the “galloping Islamization” underway in Malaysia. Many protested the ruling, from Chinese and Indian component parties of the ruling coalition Barisan Nasional, to the Malaysian Bar, to cabinet members and various rights groups.

 “It is not fair to say that one parent can determine a child’s religion if the parent decides to convert to Islam.... As a lawyer and a Muslim, I am not comfortable with the situation,” Tourism and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz had told the Malaysian daily, The Star.

The government has withdrawn the bill, yet more recently made Islamic and Asian Civilisation Studies compulsory for local students in private universities. With Chinese Buddhist organizations condemning the move as an “attempt at indoctrination,” it appears this conflict will continue well into the future.