No, not that one – the other one.
Granted, this seems to be the work of one rogue bureaucrat – or perhaps that’s what it’s being portrayed as now the story has gotten out – but this is absolutely outrageous:
The Home Office refused asylum to an Iranian who converted from Islam to Christianity because, it said, Christianity was not a peaceful religion.
Immigration officials wrote to the man, who had converted to Christianity on the ground that it was a peaceful religion, citing violent passages from the Bible to support their claim. They said that the Book of Revelation was “filled with imagery of revenge, destruction, death and violence”.
The Church of England condemned the “lack of religious literacy” after the man said that he now faced persecution in Iran for his faith. Church officials called for a “serious overhaul” of Home Office policies.
The letter cited a passage from Leviticus in the Old Testament, which says: “You will pursue your enemies and they will fall by the sword before you.” It also referenced chapter ten of Matthew’s gospel, in which Jesus says: “I came not to send peace, but a sword.”
It said: “These examples are inconsistent with your claim that you converted to Christianity after discovering it is a ‘peaceful’ religion, as opposed to Islam which contains violence, rage and revenge.”
Firstly, it shouldn’t matter why the unnamed Iranian asylum applicant decided to convert to Christianity – or to Pastafarianism for that matter – only that his or her life is in danger in Iran as a result of being an apostate from Islam. Of course, the bona fides should be checked as part of the process to ensure that the conversion is genuine and not a trick to obtain a refugee status.
Secondly, on the basis of such textual interpretation, no Muslim should be allowed to claim asylum in Britain or for that matter be allowed any sort of entry visa ever. Of course, what really matters is not whether a holy book is violent in parts – both the Bible and the Koran contain their fair share of R-rated material – but the likelihood that an adherent of a particular religion will interpret such passages as commandments or calls to arms. For Christians, this is pretty much zero these days. These ain’t the Crusades any more.
And thirdly, and I mean it with the greatest of respect to the Home Office but what the actual [deleted]ing [deleted] ?
