Le site refdag.nl est-il sûr ?

The "Reformatorisch Dagblad" (Dutch for Reformist Newspaper) is a far-right wing newspaper in the Netherlands. I read the paper often and I often tend to cringe a lot. Take for example this article (in Dutch): ***** 11:40 | revised ***** 14:23 | Editorial inland Fries bedrijf wil geen homostagiair /// link: http://www.refdag.nl/nieuws/binnenland/fries_bedrijf_wil_geen_homostagiair_1_954834 In short, it is about a company in Northern Netherlands that rejected an out-of-closet, practicing homosexual male intern, on grounds of the fact that "God has never approved the practice of homosexuality in His Word", and the company rejected the intern because "the company rather obeys Him than humans". Let's analyze this: Rejecting an intern, or employee on grounds of his sexual orientation is discriminatory, and quite bigoted and hateful. And blindly following "Him" (God) and throwing your judgment aside because you'd rather "obey Him than humans" is extremely biased, if not ignorant. Also, who are the "editorials inland"? (I had a hard time translating it, but it probably means "insider editorials" or something). It is unspecific and vague, and I cannot seem to find anywhere on the site who in Jesus's name those editorials are. They are probably just editorials who work for the newspaper or their sponsors. Or rather, their "great Sponsor". Then let's scroll down the page: The newspaper does not clearly state their support against the decision, but does not really state other views, neither do they call the company's representatives out on their hate and bigotry. While this does not prove anything in itself, it does imply that the paper passively agrees with the company's decision. Then let's scroll even further down: There is no comment section. The newspaper does not cite any source whatsoever, except for "multiple media outlets" at the top of the page (a very questionable source in itself). The paper itself is also extremely subjective, usually interpreting things through a right-wing, Conservative, Protestant Christian bias. The editors seem a bit like they're all patting their backs, praising their Lord and generally living in their own little bubble. Another article here (I won't go in as much lengths as above, to make the comment take up less space, but I will if anyone requests me to do so): ***** 16:01 | no revisions | Albert-Jan Regterschot | Aad Kamsteeg wil lessen van vervolgde christenen doorgeven /// link: aad_kamsteeg_wil_lessen_van_vervolgde_christenen_doorgeven_1_939743 "What kan Christians in the West learn about the persecuted church?" is the question that "journalist and opinion-maker" Aad Kraamsteeg asked years ago during a visit to China. "Journalist and opinion-maker" seems a bit suspicious to me. What is an "opinion-maker"? Someone who makes opinions? Lectures others? I don't know for sure. "Years ago" is unclear and vague. Later on, the short article continues saying that "the answers he got, worked to him like a mirror. "Christians in the West are being distracted by prosperity" and he is working on a project to share his findings with the Church. "Worked to him like a mirror" is very biased, like he immediately related to "the answers" (which are not even specified at all) and believed it, with no questions whatsoever. Speaking of persecution of Christians around the world; the newspaper is very selective when reporting things about human rights violation, persecution of minors and discrimination. It only tells about Christians being persecuted, and often the rare Jewish minority. The extermination of Muslims in Burma is rarely, if ever, told about. I can only find a few articles, which again are all too ready to also spend some time talking about the Christian side of things. Let's look here (the last one, I promise): ***** 19:27 | revised ***** 19:28 | Albert-Jan Regterschot /// Onzekerheid voor christenen en moslims in Birma nog niet ten einde /// link: http://www.refdag.nl/kerkplein/kerknieuws/onzekerheid_voor_christenen_en_moslims_in_birma_nog_niet_ten_einde_1_954675 The muslims are basically mentioned once, after which the Christian point of view is narrated once again: "Besides, all kinds of groups, among which Christian minorities, took up arms". Notice how the writer does not specify any "minority" beyond, you guessed it, their Christian brothers. Whole sections of articles are blocked out unless you have a "DigiBron Plus" subscription. "Bron" means "Source", and probably both passively implies that the newspaper has its own sources, sponsored or otherwise, as well as refering to the "Source of life", the all-too-bright Jesus Christ. It is also quite misleading and unethical in that only the top of the article is shown in non-subscriber mode, so you cannot even review their sources in the first place, without paying them money. Obvious salespractices. Who are they sponsored by? "Erdee Media Group". Erdee... just pronounce it; Er-dee. R-D. Reformatorisch Dagblad. A thinly veiled attempt to conceal that the newspaper is probably just controlled by the sponsors' media newshounds. I think I'm being obvious here, but let's say it again: Do not take them seriously. That's it.