GAY TRUTH

English: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Now that the US Supreme Court has illegitimately redefined marriage , it's open season on Christians and other people of faith who continue to believe that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Supporters of marriage across the country have been charged by governmental entities with "discrimination" and subsequently fined , shamed and punished. In Washington , the state Attorney General is suing a 70-year old grandmother simply because she didn't want to personally participate in arranging flowers for a gay 'wedding' because doing so violates her religious beliefs. He has threatened her with financial ruin unless she agrees to apologize, change her ways and pay a fine. Across the border in Oregon , the state has fined two Christian bakers $135,000 because they did not want to bake a cake celebrating a gay 'wedding' even

Penny Wong, Senator for South Australia,  supports immoral homosexual marriage and wants to force her views on all of Australia (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Groans and heckling greeted Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi each time he raised the rights of children to be allowed to know their mother and father. Loud applause greeted Senator Penny Wong each time she made a point supporting same-sex marriage . Another illogical unreasoned debate with ignorant journalist unable to think beyond the obvious. In what was the hottest ticket in town today at Canberra ’s National Press Club, the atmosphere felt more like ABC1’s Q & A program as the two debated changing the definition of marriage . With a cross-party bill to be introduced into Parliament in two week’s time, today’s press club debate was a sell-out. The pair jousted over rights of children and freedom of speech and conscience. While Senator Wong rightly points out that some same-sex couples already have children, she does no

th the Supreme Court's marriage decision in Obergefell vs. Hodges, one might think that equality for gay families has arrived. But that would be a mistake. The court's ruling could work to produce new conflicts and intensify old ones. The danger arises because marriage equality doesn't immediately or necessarily erase cultural and legal attachments to biological, dual-gender parenting. Consider the position of David Blankenhorn , head of the Institute for American Values and star witness in favor of Proposition 8 when California's gay-marriage ban went on trial in 2010. Back then, Blankenhorn justified such bans based on "[t]he need … to make it as likely as we can, that the biological parents are also the social and legal parents." In 2012, Blankenhorn announced a change of heart on same-sex marriage, but he still hoped "both gays and straight[s]" could agree that "children born through artificial reproductive technology [have] the rig

Just days before Irish citizens voted in favor of same-sex marriage in May, a headline in the Independent warned: “surrogacy fears could sink ‘ Yes ’ campaign.” During the final weeks leading up to the referendum, government leaders and advocates of the “yes” vote to redefine marriage tried to distance themselves from the issue of surrogacy for fear that the two issues might be conflated. Such behavior offers a telling though little discussed insight that’s particularly applicable for our own nation, especially now that the Supreme Court has ruled that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage: A growing number of LGBT activists actively oppose surrogacy, even though gay men are the primary users of the practice. Surrogacy is not legal in Ireland, though some commentators believe that the acceptance of same-sex marriage will lead to its inevitable acceptance. In an interview leading up to the vote in Ireland, Justice Kevin Cross, the head of the Referendum Commission ,

Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) One of the same-sex marriage movement ’s most potent polemical tools has been, and surely will continue to be, its equation of same-sex marriage with interracial marriage . On this telling, today’s opposition to same-sex marriage is akin to the opposition to interracial marriage mounted by yesterday’s racists and segregationists. If this assumption were granted, then the legal recognition of same-sex marriage would seem to realize a legitimate equality. A public—like our own—that had largely accepted this parity could at least acquiesce in such a step once it has been imposed by the Supreme Court. Now the Supreme Court has actually taken such a step and in the course of doing so has given credence to the analogy between same-sex marriage and interracial marriage. This argument will be employed to discredit and demonize those who dissent, those who do not want to cooperate in a distortion of the meaning of marriage. Such dissenters, we

The Australian Christian Lobby is demanding the Queensland Government cease supporting a school based anti-bullying program for gay, intersex and gender diverse children, accusing it of promoting "radical sexual experimentation", by encouraging the acceptance of gender and sexual diverse children. The Safe Schools Coalition Australia program was made available to Queensland schools from the start of the second semester this year. The federally-funded program, which is also available in Victoria, New South Wales, the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania , is not compulsory, with principals able to choose whether or not their school could benefit from it. Building on a Victorian model, SSCA, which has been approved by the federal education department as a resource, addresses homophobia and transphobia within schools and is designed to make the school environment "more inclusive for same-sex attracted, intersex and gender diverse young people". ACL's Que

The same-sex marriage debate entered a new phase of intolerance with Labor voting to expel parliamentarians who advocate man-woman only marriage. In two Parliaments time , Labor MPs and Senators who vote against redefining marriage will be expelled from the party. Australian Christian Lobby Managing Director Lyle Shelton said this was devastating for the millions of ethnic, indigenous and religious Australians who will never support a state-imposed redefinition of marriage . “Sadly this is a cynical ploy to force the Coalition to drop its policy on marriage when Labor’s real agenda is one of intolerance to its own who dissent. “If this is the principle Labor forces its people to comply with, what will be the out-working of this principle on dissenters when it is next in power? “Will there be freedom of conscience to choose not to provide services to same-sex weddings ? “Will Christian, Muslim and Jewish schools be allowed to teach children a definition of marriage that the party

The campaign to redefine marriage has recently gained such momentum – with now three and soon four bills before the Commonwealth Parliament – that many think it is inevitable. This can leave those with misgivings feeling that they are already losers in a done deal. Some think it is the inexorable progress of liberty and equality – which leaves the doubters on “the wrong side of history.” In this context supporters of classical marriage are presumed to have no real arguments to offer. So here I want to offer some reasons – not decrees from on high or from the past, not expressions of hatred or prejudice – but reasons I hope anyone can understand. I also hope these reasons prove persuasive and helpful in proclaiming and witnessing to true marriage among families, friends and colleagues. Regardless, I hope this will help explain why Australian law has always held, and many people still hold, that marriage is for people of opposite sex. I will examine five common slogans in this debate –