GAY TRUTH

BE warned. If you mention you are going to vote “No” in the homosexual marriage plebiscite you will most likely be branded a bigot. Now homosexual couples are accepted and have full legal rights . They already have equality and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise. “Society” will turn on you. You may even be ostracised in your workplace, nursing home or footy club. So much freedom of speech. What same-sex marriage proponents like Bill Shorten and Malcolm Turnbull neglect to tell you is this: Redefining marriage is redefining parenthood. Homosexual marriage supporters wrongly say that traditional parenting doesn’t matter anymore and that it is OK to bring a child up without a father or without a mother. Same-sex marriage is a misguided concept. And it is not simply a symbolic gesture as the left-wing columnists rush to tell you. It will have far-reaching consequences for children. Here I stress that opponents of same-sex marriage shouldn’t become bigots either. We all know the

The ABC reports: Government backbencher Warren Entsch has introduced a bill to legalise same-sex marriage in the lower house, despite knowing it is highly unlikely to go to a vote before the next election. In his address to parliament Mr Entsch warned of a "divided nation" unless gay marriage is legalised. "The main purpose of this bill is not a complex one. It is to give same-sex couples in Australia the same right to marry the person they love as that which is currently only granted by law to heterosexual couples," he told the chamber. What Entsch doesn't understand if his legislation is approved the nation will STILL BE DIVIDED "This bill is designed to promote an inclusive Australia, not a divided one. A divided nation is what we will be if we continue to allow discrimination in relation to marriage on the basis of a person's sexuality." Entsch Homosexual marriage bill contains no safeguards for anybody or organization that disagr

Tony Abbott was right to argue in favour of traditional marriage after his party room vote. There are good reasons why people oppose same-sex marriage and the cultural left should understand that, writes Kevin Donnelly. In last night's speech after the majority of Liberal/National MPs voted in favour of the current policy on same-sex marriage, Prime Minister Tony Abbott was right to argue that marriage should be between a man and a woman and that the Australian people should decide if there is to be a change. Those wanting to introduce a private member's bill to change the definition of marriage, such as Liberal MP Warren Entsch , must now realise that the matter is settled until the people decide. This is especially the case as many of the arguments in favour of same-sex marriage are flawed. Those wanting change argue that defining marriage as involving a man and a woman discriminates against lesbians and homosexuals. Ignored is that there are many examples where society

CANBERRA , Australia , August 11, 2015 -- Defenders of natural marriage in Australia have had a stunning ' David vs Goliath ' win against a well-funded pro-same sex “marriage” lobby group that had the active support of the mainstream media and corporate bodies.  After a marathon six-hour party room meeting dedicated to the issue, two-thirds of government MPs have voted to maintain the position of voting as a block along party lines rather than permit members to have a conscience vote on the issue. This means that the coalition government will honour the commitment it went to the election with, to maintain the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman.  As a result, the private members' bill put forward by opposition leader Bill Shorten will fail should it come to a vote.  The politicians pushing for same sex “marriage” had rushed to bring their bill forward to take advantage of the political momentum generated by the United States Supreme Court d

Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) ACL boss Lyle Shelton , who penetrated deep into the enemy territory of ABC Radio National . Pure gold: so focussed on the heart of the matter - being the fact that gay 'marriage' means gay PARENTING under international law, and that means a child of such a 'marriage' is forced - by an abusive Act of Parliament - to miss out on either their mother or their father. What is there to celebrate? Not to mention (as Lyle does) the profound consequences such as the state usurping the authority of parents in the moral education of their children; not to mention the state harassment (seen overseas) of individuals who believe marriage can only ever be a man-woman thing; not to mention Lyle's cut-through point that if you remove the criterion of gender from marriage, it is not logically possible to limit marriage by number. Gee, did the question of group marriage get Fran Kelly hopping and wishing she had got some tame gay ac

Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) · Visiting doctor condemns homosexual rally for indifference to the love between mother and baby. · A new Australian Galaxy poll shows a big relative majority of Australians think it is more important for a child to have the love of both mother and father, than for two men to have the right to marry and create a family. As hundreds held placards saying “love is love” at the rally for 'marriage equality' in various capital cities in Australia, a visiting family doctor condemned what he calls the “blind narcissism” of gay activists. “Gay 'marriage' would affirm one love”, said Dr David van Gend, President of the Australia Marriage Forum, “but it would destroy other, more primal loves. “I'll tell you what love is. It is the tenderness between a mother and her baby – but gay 'marriage' tears mother and baby apart. “If you give two men the right to marry, you give them the right to create motherl

Same Sex Marriage (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Opposing change on the basis of deeply held beliefs isn’t bigotry. In recent years there has been a remarkable shift in sentiment across the Western world about same-sex marriage . It may well be that in the next Federal Parliament, if not in this, there will be a majority of MPs who support change. The change in thinking is particularly apparent in the Labor Party . Less than four years ago, party policy was to oppose same-sex marriage. A little more than 10 years ago it voted with the Coalition to include in the Marriage Act a definition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Now, by 2019, MPs who hold that view will no longer be able to have a conscience vote on the matter. The implicit message, regrettably, is that people of devout faith who hold traditional views about marriage are no longer welcome in the party – a position that will be electorally dangerous for Labor in the long term. These are the "true believers&q

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 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

English: Craig Thomson, Member of the Australian House of Representatives for the Australian Labor Party and Dobell. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Further evidence of the intolerance of the leading voices in the same-sex marriage debate will be on display again at this weekend’s Australian Labor Party National Conference in Melbourne . At its last conference in 2011, Labor changed its party policy to support redefining marriage in law. It was a terrible blow to have one of the two major political parties capitulate. However, at that time, Labor made an important concession. Normally conscience votes on both sides of politics are reserved for life or death matters such as abortion or euthanasia. But in this case, after tense backroom negotiations, Labor decided to depart from this political rule of thumb and allow its parliamentarians a conscience vote . Under Labor’s party rules, parliamentarians who vote against party policy are automatically expelled. (The Liberal’s don’t expel

English: Tony Abbott in 2010. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Prime Minister Tony Abbott must not grant his party room a conscience vote on immoral homosexual marriage if the Liberal party is to remain a "moral shining light for the community", a group of young people in Melbourne say. The Caulfield Young Liberals have moved a motion at this weekend's Liberal State Council that calls upon the Federal Liberal Parliamentary Party to grant MPs a conscience vote on banning immoral marriage legislation. "The Liberal Party has historically been the shining light for moral values in Australian society," they say. "If we are to stay true to these values then, when there are a range of immoral incoherent even ugly divergent views on issues of morality and complex ethical questions, issues that can only be determined by personal conscience, we must not grant a conscience vote." When same-sex marriage was voted on in the federal parliament in September 20