http://www.christiantoday.com/article/street.evangelist.arrested.after.preaching.about.sexual.sin/35309.htm
“Police in Dundee yesterday arrested American street evangelist Tony Miano after a woman complained about his talk on sexual sin.
Mr Miano was arrested as part of a street preaching team holding a week-long mission in Scotland.
He was the second speaker to address lunchtime shoppers on the city’s high street that day, and took the opportunity to talk on the different sins Jesus had come to save people from.
When he began listing sexual sins, including adultery, promiscuity, and homosexual practice, a woman started shouting in protest, angrily yelling that her son was gay.
The incident was witnessed by Pastor Josh Williamson of the Craigie Reformed Baptist Church in Perth, a fellow member of the street preaching team.
The pastor said: “Tony wasn’t focussing just on homosexual practice – it was about all sin. A woman was yelling at him and her friend noticed we were filming the preaching, so she ran up to me and tried to smash my camera.”
The woman who had shouted then appeared to be calling the police, at which point a council warden arrived and suggested that although none of the evangelists were doing anything wrong, they should probably move on.
Mr Miano finished his talk and two police officers arrived as the team of evangelists were packing up.
“The female officer saw we had a camera and lunged for it and then the male policeman grabbed it and threw it in the police van,” said Mr Williamson.
Following that, the male officer interviewed the women and then immediately arrested Mr Miano.
According to the Christian Legal Centre, Mr Miano was not questioned and the reasoning behind his arrest was not properly explained.
“After Tony was put in the police van I asked why he was being arrested and was told it was for a breach of the peace and for using homophobic language,” said Mr Williamson.
Chief Executive of the Christian Legal Centre, Andrea Minichiello Williams, says the incident raises serious questions about police procedure and their understanding of the law.
“This appears to be an overzealous reaction by the police,” she said.
“The incident adds to the number of arrests of Christian street evangelists for preaching from the Bible.
“It is indicative of the suppression of the freedom to speak and live out the words of Jesus Christ in public and present the teachings of the Bible.”
Mr Miano is a former police officer and chaplain with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department, and currently works as a teacher for open air evangelists.
He also volunteers as a writer for the Christian Apologetics Research Ministry run by Matt Slick.
It is not the first time he has been arrested in the UK while street preaching. Last July, he was arrested in Wimbledon for breaching Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, which included a ban on insulting words or behaviour.
The arrest happened after he preached on the need to abstain from sexual immorality, based on 1 Thessalonians 4:1-12.
In his preaching, which was captured on film, he told passers-by: “My friends, the reality is, we are all going to stand before God to give account for our lives.
“And whether our sin is sexual in nature or not, if we have violated his law in any way – whether it is homosexuality, whether it is refusing to abstain from evil in the heterosexual community and we are lusting after people we are indulging in fornication, but even beyond that if we have so much as told one lie – God sees us as a violator of his law, God does not see us as good.”
He was detained by police for seven hours before being released without charge. Ultimately the case was dropped.
The act under which he was arrested on that occasion will no longer be in force from 1 February of 2014, thanks to the Crime and Courts Act which was passed in April last year.
Mr Miano is still in custody following yesterday’s arrest and was due to appear before Dundee Sheriff’s Court on Thursday.”
It is with a sense of weary familiarity that we greet this further demonstration of our police state, where “tolerance”, that is to say the condoning of homosexuality, appears to have become mandatory. And yet again, I ask, why Christians? Orthodox Jewry and Islam, to name but two other religions, condemn homosexual behaviour in no uncertain terms. Were you to ask the elders of those religions to explain their position on them, they would not be slow to respond.
Yet it is Christians, and Christians only, who are persecuted like this. Perhaps it is because it is only Christians who, in the modern world, preach in the street (I place Abu Hamza’s street preaching in Finsbury Park in 2004 in a rather different category). I imagine that they follow the lead of John Wesley, who said “I am well assured that I did far more good to my Lincolnshire parishioners by preaching three days on my father’s tomb than I did by preaching three years in his pulpit.” and “To this day field preaching is a cross to me, but I know my commission and see no other way of preaching the gospel to every creature”. To this, Charles Spurgeon went further when he said, ”No sort of defense is needed for preaching out of doors, but it would need very potent arguments to prove that a man had done his duty who has never preached beyond the walls of his meeting-house. A defense is required for services within buildings than for worship outside of them.”
To their considerable credit, those who are persecuted seem to be made of stern stuff. We have discussed Dr Alan Clifford here previously; Mr Miano is also of the type who appears not to be for turning. Whether or not you agree with these men, they deserve your support; they are the enemies of the current ideology of our state and have placed themselves in direct and visible confrontation with that ideology.
I suppose while I am about it, a few words concerning Phil Robertson are in order. I have to confess that I do not watch very much television. Robertson and his “reality television” show “Duck Dynasty” were strangers to me at the time of the controversy, and before I could form a view on his case, I would need to brief myself with what materials were available online. What I found was generally more palatable than the majority of mass media offerings that I have had the misfortune to encounter. The appeal of Robertson and his clan is, it seems, the cognitive dissonance between a large extended family who dress and act in “redneck” manner, living a traditional, outdoors life, while in fact being highly educated and successful businesspeople. Doubtless a good deal is played up and exaggerated for the cameras, but despite this there is no getting away from the fact that what is shown of these people is likeable and that their family and community is clearly a strong one. Moreover, these people are Christians, and each show ends with a communal meal before which Robertson offers prayer. It is not surprising that such views of traditional family life are popular in urban America, where they are becoming rarer these days.
Robertson’s interview with GQ magazine has been widely reported, and can be read here. His views on the contrast of homosexuality and heterosexuality, and the sinful nature of the former, are clearly rooted not merely in what we might term a graphic naturalism but also in a familiarity with what the Bible has to say on these subjects. Knowing that Robertson is a Christian, it would be surprising if he did not hold these views; they are similar to the views held by the vast majority of adherents to that faith throughout its existence. Knowing also that the media are “strong supporters and champions of the LGBT community” – as A&E, the production company responsible for “Duck Dynasty” proclaimed, it would not be surprising that their values would not be congruent with traditional Christianity. A&Es response was to suspend Robertson indefinitely.
What is pleasantly surprising, however, is that Robertson won not merely a victory for himself, but a victory on an important point of principle. A number of prominent individuals supported him, not because they shared his beliefs, but because they endorsed his right to express them even though they did not agree with them. Others rallied to Robertson’s support, pointing out that what he had said was a wholly mainstream belief within Christianity and that his expression of it, and in particular his restraint from judgment, had been about as far from hatred or homophobia as it was possible to be. The result was that after nine days and a massive public backlash A&E rescinded its decision and restored Robertson to his show.
Perhaps it is Robertson’s words, then, that should be better known in the corridors of power here. He tells us “I would never treat anyone with disrespect just because they are different from me. We are all created by the Almighty and like Him, I love all of humanity. We would all be better off if we loved God and loved each other.” It cuts both ways. In academic terms it is the distinction between the theological and the pastoral; between hating the sin and loving the sinner. Clearly this is a point that our police have yet to understand.
Filed under: Liberty Tagged: duck dynasty, street preachers 
