GAY TRUTH

SACRAMENTO, CA , July 24, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – The California Supreme Court has denied a clerk's petition that he not be forced to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses until a court clarify whether it is legal for him to do so. San Diego County Clerk Ernest Dronenburg, who issues marriage licenses for a living, filed suit to seek “legal clarification” that he was acting according to legal norms. Ernest Dronenburg asked the court to guide him, without success Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris ordered the state to begin issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples who request them following the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling that the  state's voters lacked standing to defend Proposition 8 , the constitutional amendment voters approved defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. However, the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of Proposition 8 itself.  Article III, Section 3.5 of the California Constitutio

SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CA , July 22, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews ) – A San Diego County clerk has asked the California Supreme Court to strike down a directive issued by Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris ordering clerks statewide to issue marriage certificates to same-sex couples in violation of Proposition 8 , California ’s voter-approved ban on homosexual “marriage.” San Diego County Clerk Ernest Dronenburg’s lawyers told the high court their client is “caught in the crossfire of a legal struggle over the definition of marriage.” “On the one hand, respondents have ordered him not to enforce state law and are threatening to punish him if he does not comply with that order,” Dronenburg's lawyers wrote in the lawsuit. “On the other hand, petitioner has an independent statutory obligation to enforce California law defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman.” California county clerk Ernest Dronenburg They asked the court to grant an immediate stay to pr

Logo of the Family Research Council. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) LONG ISLAND, NY , July 17, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews ) – Young boys preening in front of mirrors putting on makeup, picking flowers in skirts, and prancing in heels and dresses at a talent show: all these are depicted in controversial photoessay, featured on Slate this week, documenting an annual summer camp for gender confused boys. The images are drawing praise from gay activists, and criticisms from pro-family leaders. For the last three years, photographer Lindsay Morris has attended the four-day-long camp for “ gender variant ” boys from 6 to 16 and their families held in an undisclosed location in New England.  Morris refers to the camp by the pseudonym “Camp ‘You Are You,’” although her description of the camp closely matches the one given on the  website  for  Camp Aranu’tiq  for "transgender" boys, which was featured last year in the  Boston Globe , and which makes campers and visitors sign a confiden

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 ) The Supreme Court ’s ruling on Proposition 8 has me feeling like that about our legal system. the history of Proposition 8 . To summarize, Californians passed a law in 2000 saying that marriage was between a man and a woman, but authorizing same sex domestic partnerships with all the benefits of marriage except the word  marriage . Four years later an unelected county clerk in San Francisco started giving out marriage licenses to same sex couples, and this lasted for five months until the State Supreme Court stopped it. Then four years later (2008), the court reversed itself, saying the 2000 law was unconstitutional. Christians were essentially told if they wanted to define marriage, they needed a constitutional amendment to do that. Which is wha

Many people simply don’t grasp the lies behind the challenge to Proposition 8 . The first lie: the challenge was about gay marriage. The truth is that it is about a Christian’s right to vote. The second lie: Proposition 8 took away a right to gay marriage. The truth is, that right never (legally) existed in California. In 2000, California voters approved a law that defined marriage as between a man and a woman, while granting the state the ability to give all the benefits of marriage to couples in a same-sex domestic partnership. This was the everything but the word “marriage” approach to same-sex unions. When those partnerships were being debated in the legislature, even homosexual activists claimed that they did not want the word marriage. It was a religious term, they said, and one with which they wanted nothing to do. But in 2004, the mayor San Francisco directed his county clerk to begin issuing marriage licenses to same sex couples. This office is non-elected, and the clerk

Today the Supreme Court issued rulings on two historic and controversial cases which challenged the legal validity, at both the state and federal level, of the the traditional definition of marriage. Here are nine things you should know about the cases: 1. The two cases,  United States v. Windsor   and  Hollingsworth v. Perry , are each based on differing -- and perhaps mutually exclusive -- theories of which level of government has the right to define marriage. The challenge to DOMA ( Windsor ) was based on the claim that marriage is a matter for state rather than federal regulation while the challenge to Proposition 8 ( Hollingsworth ) was a challenge to to the claim that an individual state can define marriage as between one woman and one man. 2.  United States v. Windsor  was a direct challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). This  case was not about  whether there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, but rather whether Congress can treat married same