GAY TRUTH

LONDON , March 11, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – A claim made this weekend  by the Daily Mail  and ABC Australia On Line news, that Queen Elizabeth II will endorse “gay rights” and “gender equality” is being disputed today by both homosexualist campaigners and the Mail’s own editorial staff. An article in the Mail claimed, under the headline “Queen fights for gay rights,” that a charter of “values” for the 54 nations of the Commonwealth includes wording that is “being seen as including sexuality”. The Queen was set to attend a ceremony to mark Commonwealth Day , during which she was to sign the charter that sets out “core values” for all leaders of Commonwealth nations. The charter says, “We are implacably opposed to all forms of discrimination, whether rooted in gender, race, colour, creed, political belief or other grounds.” It is these unspecified “other grounds” that the Mail is claiming means “gay rights”.  Today, however, doubt is growing that this could have been the Que

British actor Rupert Everett at the 2007 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Everett was seen as a champion for gay actors when he decided to come out of the closet two decades ago. Now Rupert Everett finds himself in a somewhat less enviable position. The 53-year-old actor has been rounded on by gay rights groups after saying: "I can’t think of anything worse that being brought up by two gay dads." Everett’s comments are likely to offend celebrity parents such as Sir Elton John and his partner David Furnish . The couple have a 21-month-old son Zachary, born to a surrogate mother. Ben Summerskill , chief executive of the gay rights group Stonewall, said: "Rupert should get out a little bit more to see the facts for himself. "There is absolutely no evidence that the kids of gay parents suffer in the way they are being brought up or in how they develop.’ However, this denial fails in the face the the Regernus study which has been vil

Summary The Church of England cannot support the proposal to enable ―all couples, regardless of their gender, to have a civil marriage ceremony .  Such a move would alter the intrinsic nature of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, as enshrined in human institutions throughout history. Marriage benefits society in many ways, not only by promoting mutuality and fidelity, but also by acknowledging an underlying biological complementarity which, for many, includes the possibility of procreation.  We have supported various legal changes in recent years to remove unjustified discrimination and create greater legal rights for same sex couples and we welcome that fact that previous legal and material inequities between heterosexual and same-sex partnerships have now been satisfactorily addressed.   To change the nature of marriage for everyone will be divisive and deliver no obvious legal gains given the rights already conferred by civil partnerships . We also believe

Image via Wikipedia In what is being interpreted by some as an abrupt “u-turn,” the UK ’s Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has said that Christians are being treated too harshly by judges in legal battles , mostly over complaints brought forward by homosexuals. Commission lawyers say they are concerned that rulings against Christians already made by UK and European courts have created “a body of confusing and contradictory case law.” “Judges have interpreted the law too narrowly in religion or belief discrimination claims,” said a statement posted to the organization’s website. The EHRC also said that it will ask leave to intervene in upcoming cases at the European Court of Human Rights .  In several cases Christians who have come into conflict with homosexualist activists under the UK’s recently installed Equality laws, are pursuing their complaints at the Strasbourg court. These include  Lillian Ladele , the marriage registrar who refused to perform same-sex civil pa