Suddenly, The U.K. Wants the UN to Believe Women Aren’t People

For 41 years, the UN had in place a treaty that protected pregnant women from the death penalty. And for 41 years, women were people. But now, the brave new worlders across the pond have discovered a shocking fact: Women aren’t people.

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights is up for a rework, because we all know that UN international agreements on civil rights are always followed to the letter and everyone in the world is completely protected by them. Sorry, I can’t help myself from the sarcasm.

In the ever-so-politically-correct chambers of Whitehall, those who study these agreements word by word have determined that the term “pregnant women” does not offer sufficient protection for all the possible people who can be pregnant. So they have suggested “pregnant people,” so as not to “exclude transgender people who have given birth.”

This buys into the lie that a man could possibly carry a child to term in his uterus and give birth. In the last 41,000 years, or the last 41 years, men have not developed the ability to grow a uterus. Men do not have physical, biological bodies that could nurture, carry, or birth a child. It has always been, and continues to be, impossible.

So what we’re talking about is women with gender dysphoria, who dress and act like men, even taking male hormones to grow facial hair, who also stop those hormone treatments, revert to their natural state, become impregnated (by a biological man), carry and birth a child. The U.K. word-pickers want the UN and all the countries that give International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights due consideration before denigrating and enslaving women to use the correct terminology.

They want to validate those nations where women are treated like second-class citizens by acknowledging that women have even lost the ability to perform their unique biological function of giving birth and nurturing the young. It’s not women who become pregnant, it’s people with uteruses, which could now include men with women’s reproductive organs.

At least one feminist has retained her sanity on this.

“This isn’t inclusion. This is making women unmentionable. Having a female body and knowing what that means for reproduction doesn’t make you ‘exclusionary.’ Forcing us to decorously scrub out any reference to our sex on pain of being called bigots is an insult,” said feminist author and U.N. commentator Sarah Ditum.

Well said. The more these “gender” lines are erased, the more that women, violence against women, and human trafficking can be ignored and sacrificed to the gods of political correctness.

Women around the world experience gender-based violence at incredible rates. According to the United Nations’ own numbers, 35% of women worldwide have experienced some form of sexual violence; 750 million women and girls were married before their 18th birthday; 120 million girls were raped before they were 18; 200 million have experienced female genital mutilation; and women and girls account for more than 71% of humans trafficked across the globe.

These pencil pushers in London really need to check their priorities. If they really cared about protecting “pregnant people” from violence, they’d stop trying to say women aren’t people.

Britain’s Liberal Democrat Party Leader Resigns Because Of His Christian Faith

It’s a statement we hear a lot coming from conservatives: “I don’t understand how a person can be a Christian and be a liberal.” Between remaining faithful to policies on abortion, transgenderism, and the size of government that fly in the face of Biblical beliefs and the general hostility toward faith on the Left, political liberalism is becoming increasingly less of a place for a Christian to feel at home.

The latest example has happened across the pond, where Tim Farron, once the leader of Britain’s Liberal Democrat Party, has stepped down from that position because he found it difficult to reconcile his party loyalty and his faith in Jesus Christ.

“The consequences of the focus on my faith is that I have found myself torn between living as a faithful Christian and serving as a political leader,” he said in a televised statement.

“To be a political leader – especially of a progressive, liberal party in 2017 – and to live as a committed Christian, to hold faithfully to the Bible’s teaching, has felt impossible for me.”

It’s easy to leave a party whose numbers in Parliament paled in comparison to the giant Tory and Labour parties, but Farron – whose record included support for gay rights and a pro-choice position on abortion – found himself repeatedly grilled about his Christian faith in television interviews, largely hounded about whether he thinks homosexuality is a sin. He addressed this treatment in his statement (including an admission that he hadn’t always handled himself well in those interviews).

“From the very first day of my leadership, I have faced questions about my Christian faith. I’ve tried to answer with grace and patience. Sometimes my answers could have been wiser.”

He also said:

“I seem to be the subject of suspicion because of what I believe and who my faith is in. In which case we are kidding ourselves if we think we yet live in a tolerant, liberal society.”

Part of the problem with Farron’s party is that its leader was forced to spend too much time in interviews debating the religiosity of his political positions. This wasn’t so much Farron’s fault as it is the fault of contemporary liberalism. The secular Left (a term which is becoming increasingly redundant) views faithful Christianity as something to be ignored at best and stamped out at worst.

Over at National Review, Michael Brendan Dougherty put it this way:

The entire elite culture and much of the popular culture is secular in a quite specific way. It is not a secularism that encourages public neutrality while maintaining a generous social pluralism. It’s a secularism that demands the humiliation of religion, specifically Christianity. And in Britain it has a decidedly classist flavor, one that holds it impossible for an Evangelical like Farron — one of those people — to represent the better sort of person.

In supremely secular Britain, Farron’s Christianity was seen as more of a freak show than a valid system of belief. It stood to reason that he would one day have to choose between his faith in Jesus Christ and his devotion to political party.

In a uniquely British way, Tim Farron was made to care. Good for him for choosing to care about the right things in life.

Oxford University Changes Core History Exam To Give Higher Grades To Women

Oxford University – long held as one of the premier educational institutions in the world – is changing one of its core history exams in order to ensure that more women get the highest possible grade on the test.

One of Oxford’s five final-year history exams will be replaced by a paper that can be done at home to try to improve results for female students.

The move, which begins in the next academic year, comes as statistics showed 32% of women achieved a first in history at Oxford, compared with 37% of men.

Under the new exam structure, students most likely will be given similar questions to the existing exam, but rather than completing the test within a specifically designated time frame, students will have several days at home to finish.

University officials say that the “gender gap” was a major factor in considering the new exam, along with the fact that the new format would “reward research skills rather than memorisation, or performance under pressure.”

The decision isn’t without its controversy, however. Even the university admits that the risk of plagiarism grows with a take-home test. There’s no guarantee that students won’t collaborate, cheat, or seek outside help with the exam.

The exam isn’t exactly a hit with professors either.

Not everyone in the faculty welcomed the move away from traditional exams. While the introduction of a “take-home” paper was supported by staff and students, some of those who attended meetings about the reform warned that it increased the risk of plagiarism and could reduce academic rigour. “We don’t want girls within the faculty to be blamed for ‘softening’ the course,” one said.

So in this era when the college experience seems more and more like a joke, even highly acclaimed institutions like Oxford are changing important exams simply for the sake of giving higher grades to one group. Even if the new exams are a good idea and truly become a better barometer of academic performance, the reason behind it is totally ridiculous.

It’s enough to make you worry about the future – as if we didn’t have enough to create concern to begin with.

BREAKING: UK Will Host Election June 8th, Conservatives Expected to Dominate

Earlier today, British Prime Minister Theresa May announced that her nation will push forward their upcoming general election to June 8th–a move that has been labelled a “snap” election.

Her full remarks on the subject can be found below:

This comes at the heels of the impending U.K. exit from the European Union, which was officially launched its exit on March 29th. If all goes to plan, Great Britain will be fully autonomous by March 2019.

Per initial polling from YouGov, if the general election were held today, the Conservative Party would hold an overwhelming lead with 44 percent of the vote — followed by Labour Party (23%), Liberal Democrat Party(12%), UKIP Party (10%), and other parties (10%).

It’s refreshing to see Great Britain reasserting itself as a leader in Europe. Let’s hope the current May government stays in office so reformers can continue to influence policy there.