GAY TRUTH

The city of Boston allows any group to schedule an event at the city council plaza and fly their flag next to the American flag . Any kind of group, that is, unless the group or flag is Christian. Gay “pride” flags, transgender flags , Chinese Progressive Association flags, National Juneteenth Observance Foundation flags, and the national flags of any country, including communist countries, have flown over City Hall. But when  Camp Constitution  applied to have their day at the flagpole and speak on Christianity’s contribution to U.S. history, flying the Christian flag was specifically denied. In September, Camp Constitution planned to bring speakers to highlight the influence of Christianity on American freedom and rule of law. The camp’s leaders wanted to offer faith-based ideas for racial reconciliation. Camp Constitution  applied  to the city in July and gave several possible dates, including September 7, 14, or 25. The city responded September 8 with a rejection lett

A California teacher resigned after a letter he wrote for the school newspaper condemning homosexuality caused backlash. Michael Stack, a special education teacher at San Luis Obispo High School , submitted  the letter  to editor of the online  Expressions  responding to its May issue covering LGBT issues that contained a cover photo of two women kissing. He resigned May 11, the same day someone called in a death threat for him to the school. Stack had faced criticism after citing the Bible on the sinfulness of homosexuality in the letter. The passage he referenced (Romans 1:16-32) states that individuals who take part in homosexual acts “suffered within themselves the penalty they deserved” “as a result of this sin.” “Since they thought it foolish to acknowledge God,” it says, “He abandoned them to their foolish thinking and let them do things that should never be done.” The passage goes on to describe various elements of wickedness and into which their lives would d

August 2, 2012 ( thePublicDiscourse.com ) - It was only yesterday, was it not, that we were being assured that the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex partnerships would have no impact on persons and institutions that hold to the traditional view of marriage as a conjugal union? Such persons and institutions would simply be untouched by the change. It won’t affect your marriage or your life, we were told, if the law recognizes Henry and Herman or Sally and Sheila as “married.” Those offering these assurances were also claiming that the redefinition of marriage would have no impact on the public understanding of marriage as a monogamous and sexually exclusive partnership. No one, they insisted, wanted to alter those traditional marital norms. On the contrary, the redefinition of marriage would promote and spread those norms more broadly. When some of us warned that all of this was nonsense, and pointed out the myriad ways that Catholics, Evangelicals, Mormons, Eastern