GAY TRUTH

The reactions to Monday’s Supreme Court decision for Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshops have been coming fast and furious from both sides of the political spectrum. The consensus developing on the Right seems to be a suspicious celebration—the Court, after all, did not protect all religious liberty but specifically ruled that this particular Colorado baker had been the victim of anti-religious discrimination.  Thus, the precedent did not go nearly as far as most of us had hoped, and LGBT activists are surely gearing up to fight another day. Perhaps an elderly florist will make a better target. That being said, I do think that those who are determined to find a black cloud on every silver lining are also underestimating the significance of this ruling. For starters, it must be noted that Christians   needed to win this one . The ruling might not have been everything we hoped for, but a loss would have signalled the end of religious liberty in the United States, and a

The Supreme Court today pushed back against the rising tide of anti-religious sentiments in America, ruling in favour of Colorado baker Jack Phillips. Baker Jack Phillips Wins In a 7-2 decision, the court specifically rebuked the Colorado Civil Rights Commission, which had ruled against Phillips when he refused to design a wedding cake for a same-sex “marriage.” As expressed in the majority opinion of Anthony Kennedy, “The Commission’s hostility was inconsistent with the First Amendment’s guarantee that our laws be applied in a manner that is neutral toward religion.” Although the court did not issue a ruling on the wider questions regarding the conflict between religious freedoms and LGBT rights, the ruling was a major step in the right direction. May the pushback against LGBT extremism (and anti-Christian animus) continue! Ironically, the case was argued by the Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), which the SPLC brazenly labelled a hate group because of its conservative Christian v

In  Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd v Colorado Civil Rights Commission , 584 U. S. ____ (2018) (June 4, 2018), the US Supreme Court by 7-2 overturned previous decisions against a Christian cake maker, Jack Phillips, who had declined to make a wedding cake for a same-sex wedding. While the basis of the decision of the majority is fairly narrow, the outcome is clearly correct, and even in the narrow reasons offered by Justice Kennedy, there are a number of important affirmations which support religious freedom. I have commented previously on cases which involve a claim that a cake maker or other “wedding industry professional” should not be allowed to decline to devote their artistic skills to the celebration of a relationship their religion tells them is wrong: see  here ,  here,    here,  here  and  here . But the  Masterpiece  decision is the first time such a case has made its way to the final appellate court in a common law jurisdiction, and for that reason is particularly impor

In the attempt to defend permitting homosexuals to marry (i.e., man to man and woman to woman), proponents of homosexual marriage ask how such marriages would personally affect those who are opposed to it .   This is worth answering, and I believe there are two areas we need to look at in response. Philosophical Concerns How does a murder in another state between two people living in a trailer park in the middle of nowhere, among people whom we have never known and who don't know anyone we know, affect us personally?   It doesn't, but because it has no effect on us personally this doesn't mean that we should ignore the moral issues associated with  murder  and not condemn such actions.   Murder is morally wrong , and when any moral law is broken we are all ultimately affected and we know that if such actions were to increase, society would be affected...no matter where you are. Am I comparing homosexual marriage to murder and saying they are related

'He thinks it's faith but -  It tastes like cardboard, and it smells like hate."  So BBC Scotland has described Holy Communion and Catholics in its latest digital stream for young people in Scotland on homophobia. The priest holds up a Mini-Cheddar in a parody of the Host for a Catholic parishioner to receive. The presenter goes on to suggest Jesus 'wasted his time teaching small minds that love is no sin'. All this in a week when a Sunday Times poll found 20% of Catholics reported personally experiencing abuse or prejudice towards their faith and recent government figures on religiously aggravated crime showed 57% of it is now directed at Catholics, an increase of 14% ... and we all wonder why!!!

The recent decision of the England and Wales Court of Appeal in  Pemberton v Inwood  [2018] EWCA Civ 564 (22 March 2018) upholds what was in effect disciplinary action taken against a Church of England clergyman, the Reverend Canon Jeremy Pemberton, on account of his entering into a same-sex marriage. The decision is a sensible one which upholds the religious freedom of the Anglican church to operate in accordance with its fundamental religious beliefs. 1. Background Canon Pemberton is not a “beneficed” clergyman with the care of a parish, but is an ordained priest in the Church of England, who married a same-sex partner in April 2014, after the commencement in the UK of the  Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 . That Act contains very clear statements that the Church of England doctrine of marriage is not to be impacted by the change in “secular” law (see eg s 1(3) which explicitly preserves the operation of any Canons of church law providing that marriage should be