GAY TRUTH

Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) LINCOLN, NE , March 4, 2015 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) -- Homosexual activists celebrated another victory Monday as U.S. District Judge Joseph Bataillon once again ordered the state of Nebraska to stop enforcing its marriage protection amendment , which defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Bataillon, who was appointed by former president Bill Clinton , struck down the amendment when it was first challenged by gay activists ten years ago, but his decision was overturned by the 8 th  Circuit Court of Appeals.  Now that gay activists have challenged the law again, the judge has issued a new ruling barring its enforcement, citing the recent string of federal court victories by supporters of same-sex “marriage.” Bataillon said laws limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples unfairly discriminate based on “archaic” and “outdated” gender stereotypes.   “[Nebraska’s Marriage] Amendment explicitly creates a classificatio

WASHINGTON, D.C. , April 2, 2014 -- One of the nation's top military officials says President Obama told the heads of the Army, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard, and Air Force to back his repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell ( DADT ) or "resign our commissions and go do other things." In a video  published  by Buzzfeed, Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Robert Papp told Coast Guard Academy cadets on January 8, 2014 that President Obama called in the five service heads in 2010 to let them know of his decision to focus on repealing DADT. That policy, which was repealed in 2011, had been enacted in 1994 with bipartisan support, including President Bill Clinton's signature. It allowed homosexuals to serve in the military as long as homosexual relationships and attractions were not made known, though discretion was given to company commanders. Papp was speaking to the cadets about how officers should handle policies that they are required to uphold yet disagree with.

ATLANTA, GA , March 17, 2014 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – A federal judge on Friday issued an injunction temporarily blocking enforcement of Tennessee’s constitutional ban on same-sex “marriage,” noting in her decision that she believes laws defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman will soon be nothing more than historical “footnotes.” “At this point, all signs indicate that, in the eyes of the United States Constitution , [same-sex] marriages will be placed on an equal footing with those of heterosexual couples and that proscriptions against same-sex marriage will soon become a footnote in the annals of American history,” wrote Judge Aleta Trauger .  Trauger’s order means that the state must recognize – at least for now – the “marriages” of three homosexual couples who married in states where the practice is legal and have sued to overturn the 2006 ban.  The order currently applies only to those directly involved in the case. Republican Gov. Bill Haslam’

SAN ANTONIO, TX , February 26, 2014 – A federal judge ruled today that a Texas law and subsequent constitutional amendment protecting marriage as the union of a man and woman violates the U.S. Constitution , which upholds “the moral and sexual choices of homosexuals.” U.S. District Judge for Western Texas Orlando Luis Garcia said the laws had no “rational relation to a legitimate governmental purpose” but simply reflected the bigotry of the citizens of Texas. “[U.S.] Supreme Court precedent prohibits states from passing legislation born out of animosity against homosexuals, has extended constitutional protection to the moral and sexual choices of homosexuals, and prohibits the federal government from treating state-sanctioned opposite-sex marriages and same-sex marriages differently,” he wrote in his decision invalidating the amendment, as well as a 2003 law. Some 76 percent of Texas voters supported Proposition 2 in 2005, despite being outspent by more than a quarter of

Liberals have a way of renaming things in order to make them acceptable. When former- President Clinton committed adultery he called it a “mistake.” Of course, it was sin. When Prime Minister Kevin Rudd calls homosexuality a worthy social issue that brings equality to all, it is still a sin. Everyone knows that the words “choice” and “fetus” have been used to justify murder. Recently, politically correct wordsmiths have coined the phrase “same-sex marriage.” From a biblical perspective, however, a proper name for this activity, is “legalized  homosexuality .” Regardless of the attempt of two same-sex partners to justify “ marrying ” by declaring in a ceremony that they will be faithful to one another, God will neither condone nor accept their acts — even if the state eventually does. Indeed, taking vows to remain in such a sinful relationship only aggravates the situation. Moreover, the church of the Lord Jesus Christ must never participate in nor promote the legaliza

July 29, 2013 ( Breakpoint ) - A few years ago, Lanny Davis , former strategist for Bill Clinton, called on members of Congress to sign a civility pledge. “I will be civil in my public discourse and behavior,” the pledge read. “I will be respectful of others whether or not I agree with them. I will stand against incivility when I see it.” Well, I have to wonder whether Davis signed the pledge himself, because just a few days ago he wrote some deeply uncivil things in his column, titled “Purple Nation,” about people who don't share his opinion about same-sex “marriage.” Davis was responding to a letter by N. Michael Nunn , a member of the Sinai Temple in Los Angeles. Nunn wrote that for the Temple to officiate over unions of homosexual couples and call such relationships “sanctified” “is unacceptable to a sound mind.” “ Homosexuality ,” Nunn added, “is explicitly condemned in Scripture.” It “has been categorically and passionately rejected by all classical Jewish legal and e

Pro and anti-Proposition 8 protesters rally in front of the San Francisco City Hall as the California Supreme Court holds a session in the to determine the definition of marriage (Strauss v. Horton cases). (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) There is a lot of good analysis on the Supreme Court’s decisions last Wednesday to throw out California’s Proposition 8 case ( Perry  v. Hollingsworth ) and to overthrow key parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) ( United States  v.  Windsor ). Same-sex marriage supporters are elated at the incredible progress the gay rights movement has made in recent years. The more optimistic marriage defenders point out that the decisions don’t really change much: they simply refer the argument over marriage to the states, to let the democratic process, and civil society, do its work. And who could argue with this sort of federalism? But of course, both of these positions miss an important fact. In both Supreme Court decisions a law passed by a d