Syrian question

The news in the last few days in both press and on television has been dominated by the defeat of the government’s motion. So much has been written and spoken about the terrible atrocities in Syria without it being established (yet) as to who was responsible. It certainly looks as if Assad is responsible which is strange really because things seemed to be going well for him which means there was no need to court worldwide condemnation. It is right and proper to widely publicise and condemn such action.

The Archbishop of Canterbury spoke well when he pointed out that Christians were being persecuted in Syria and revenge is being taken against them by people we are supporting. Any military action taken by this country would lead to more aggression against them.

Whilst the Prime Minister is outraged by what he sees as Assad’s action, were was the Prime Minister’s outrage when Christians were being brutally murdered simply for being Christians? Houses have been destroyed, ancient Churches burned to the ground, and men women and children tortured without a word being uttered by any of our leaders.

In Iraq, Libya, Egypt and now Syria, Christians are being forced to flee for their safety in those countries. In each case the government in this country has supported the rebels who have shown total aggression against Christians, and we have provided assistance, which has ultimately been used against the Christians. There is of course systematic persecution of Christians in numerous other countries around the world, again consisting of violence, arson and murder, and in countries where we generously give financial aid.

If the Prime Minister and his colleagues were consistent in their compassion, they could be as eager to stop cheques to oppressive lands as they are to fire Cruise missiles into others.

We know the Prime Minister can be passionate about issues; we saw that when he demoralised Christians in this country with his (so called) passion to re-define marriage. I believe he was less than forthright when he offered to exclude the Church of England from the need to perform such false ceremonies, yet must have known that some couple would force the issue, as has happened, and threaten to sue the Church and pursue the matter to the European Court of Human Rights.

Minority groups are not known for their tolerance. Having been granted a major concession despite overwhelming opposition, they were not satisfied with anything less than being granted complete compliance with their demands.

Would it not be wonderful if Christians across the world were given support?