... on HOTS and the ASA

So, I've had a few people asking me why is so vehemently defend HOTS and disagree with the ASA's decision.

OK, so here's @Hayleystevens original blog post about it - http://hayleyisaghost.co.uk/healing-on-the-streets-why-i-am-not-a-group-generally-opposed-to-christianity and here's an extract:

I guess I am the only person who can state why the complaint was made and it was not made by a ‘group generally opposed to Christianity’ as HOTS Bath have alleged, not even an individual generally opposed to Christianity either. I made the complaint because claims were being made about a range of illnesses and medical conditions being healed through prayer on the streets on Bath. Some of these illnesses were severe – MS, depression, crippling disease, paralysis, asthma, and cancer just to name a few… I did not feel that the claims being made and the emphasis being put on their success was justifiable and, as the ASA adjudication comments, I felt the ads were irresponsible, because they provided false hope to those suffering from the named conditions and that is why I made the complaint. I couldn’t care less if somebody believes it is God, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti Monster that will heal the sick, but I do care when claims are being made that might be proving those who are extremely ill with hope where hope does not exist.

Firstly to answer some of the questions I've had...

HOTS has never claimed that it will, or even can, heal anyone of anything. The literature states that God can heal. The list of diseases, illnesses, afflictions, whatever you want to call them, is not supposed to be a complete or exhaustive list and is only meant to give an idea as to the sorts of things that people might want prayer for. And yes, HOTS firmly believes that God can heal anything if He so wishes.

I don't particularly like McDonalds, but I don't go and officially complain that I've been thrust a voucher as I walk down to town and on the way back again a few minutes later. I simply smile, say no thanks and walk on by. I don't need to be nannied by rules that say no-one can give out vouchers on the street. In the same way the public does not need to be nannied by ASA rules where the literature simply gives an opinion. "God can heal" is the opinion of HOTS. Whether it is intrinsically true or not is a different debate. If people don't like the idea of prayer then they are free to walk on by. I don't see how offering prayer is providing "...false hope...", it is simply providing one option that people might try. Is the medical system a false hope then because it can't guarantee success? And to say "...where hope does not exist..." is just simply plain wrong. Hope always exists, always.

So to another question. @4tis asked this question on Twitter (sorry, I don't know if I can link to a Twitter post on here????)

Wasn’t the implication in their leaflet that God intervened as a result of their prayers? In the testimonials?

Unsurprisingly, we're now getting in to the realm of faith and things are never straight forward when talking about faith and Christianity. However, yes God did intervene as a result of their prayers because they (HOTS) had faith that God could heal. (Many people come for prayer who have absolutely no faith of their own.) However, (and please don't misquote me by only using the first bit but this following sentence as well) God did not need them to pray in order to do or not do something. And this answers another question I've had. Did God need the HOTS team to pray to be able to do anything? The answer is no. Could God have healed them just at a random time when the person was at home? Yes. Why doesn't He then? (Is the obvious next question). Because the person would have no idea that God had done it if that was the case. Using my McDonalds example from earlier. If the voucher is a plain white piece of paper with simply the words 'B.O.G.O.F Cheeseburger' on it then how would I know where to go and get one? God desires that people seek after Him. If what it takes, for that person, is a healing then God may well do that. But only if the person knows that it was Him who did it so that they might respond to Him if they wish.

@latentexistence asks

Why does Christianity get a free pass from the law on Advertising and evidence?

Firstly I don't like the word 'free pass' as this implies an active allowance not a passive one, however,  on the evidence front Mark Marx is the founder of HOTS and if you follow him on facebook (https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=801459337) then you'll see plenty of stories from around the world of people being healed of many different diseases, illnesses etc. I also freely admit that God does not always heal despite many hours of prayer and as much faith as one can muster, and I can't answer why this is.
With regard to the advertising I come back to my point above about HOTS simply stating an opinion. How can the ASA regulate people or groups from presenting an opinion and choice? With the obvious exceptions of opinions that break statute, case law, public decency etc.

One final point, whilst many do not like this fact, Christianity is still the official religion of the UK and that means it has special place.

I apologise if I haven't answered some of your questions. Feel free to (politely) comment below.