GAY TRUTH

SIOUX CITY, IA , July 23, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews ) – An Evangelical pastor in Sioux City is requesting the removal of a newly-appointed member of the city’s Human Rights Commission because of hateful and threatening comments the official posted to the pastor’s Facebook page in 2010. Pastor Cary Gordon of Cornerstone World Outreach says that Human Rights Commissioner Scott Raasch, who is homosexual, wrote on Facebook that because Gordon had encouraged voters to toss out three Supreme Court judges whose court order made same-sex “marriage” legal in Iowa , he was a “hater” and a “bigot” and that he should “burn in hell” along with his entire family. “I advocated for the removal of our state supreme court judges in 2010, because they violated their oaths of office while pretending to be lawmakers, forcing gay ‘marriage’ on our state,” Gordon recounted in a  blog post .  “Thankfully, a significant majority of Iowa citizens agreed with my advocacy for the rule of law and the restricted

New Zealand principals have been warned they could breach the Human Rights Act if they stop students taking same-sex partners to their school balls. Secondary Principals' Association president Tom Parsons has highlighted the issue - hotly debated in previous years - as the ball season kicks off and acceptance of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community grows. Mr Parsons sent a letter to the country's principals yesterday outlining possible unlawful discrimination under the act if students were stopped from taking a same-sex date. Mr Parsons said the letter was a "heads up" for principals unfamiliar with the issue that arose each ball season. Human Rights Commission spokesman Gilbert Wong said cases differed, but it was ultimately against the act to discriminate against someone based on their sexual orientations. Mr Wong said a number of queries about same-sex ball partners were received each year, and resulted in a "handful" of complaints.

The owners of a guesthouse who refused to let a lesbian couple share a bed are standing firm despite threats. Karen and Michael Ruskin, of Pilgrim Planet Lodge, in central Whangarei , say they have received death threats and verbal abuse over their stance on homosexuality. But they say they will not have their beliefs silenced, even if it puts their business at risk. Lesbian couple Jane Collison, 30, and Paula Knight, 45, decided not to stay at the lodge on May 7 after being told they could only have a room with single beds. They had booked online a room with a king-sized bed but Mrs Ruskin said that when the couple arrived they were told the lodge's policy was for same-sex couples to be put into a room with two king-single beds. The engaged couple decided not to stay but could not find other accommodation until they got to Waipu . Mrs Ruskin said she was sorry for the couple's inconvenience but was standing firm on her morals and the sanctity of her home. The Ruskins live in

OTTAWA, Ontario , 7 March, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – While some Christian groups around the country have interpreted the recent Supreme Court decision in the Whatcott case as having cast the Bible in a friendly light, one of Canada’s most seasoned freedom fighters begs to differ. Ezra Levant , known for his prolonged battle with the Human Rights Commissions ,  slammed the ruling  saying that it “now makes the Bible hate speech”. Calling the ruling “100 plus pages of dangerous mush,” Levant said that the country’s lawyers and Human Rights Commissions are “rejoicing” since it means “open season on Christians now.” Bill Whatcott “Judge Rothstein [...] just wrote a judgement saying that hating gay sex is tantamount to hating gays, so the Bible, it must follow, is hate speech,” said the lawyer, political activist, and broadcaster for Sun News. The Supreme Court   made it clear  in its ruling that Bill Whatcott’s use of the Bible to reach out to homosexuals was problematic

A bill to legalise same-sex marriage is likely to be amended to explicitly state that New Zealand churches would not be forced to marry same-sex couples. A NZ parliamentary select committee considering the legislation was flooded with submissions from religious groups who felt a law change would make it unlawful to turn away gay, lesbian or transgender couples who wanted to be married. The bill's sponsor, Labour MP Louisa Wall , has repeatedly said that she wanted churches to retain their freedom of religion and expression. She felt that the Marriage Act's provision that churches were authorised, but not obliged to marry people was sufficient protection, and noted that this stance had been reinforced by the Human Rights Commission . But differing legal opinions and growing uncertainty amid some religious groups has prompted the committee to consider a clarification in the bill. Masterton Baptist Church minister Scott Lelievre accentuated the concern of some Christian leader

English: Prime Minister of Australia Julia Gillard at a Q & A Session in Rooty Hill, New South Wales (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The Left knows a great a prize is within its grasp: any law redefining marriage will mandate the new definition with the full force of anti-discrimination law, thus completing the 1960s sexual revolution. Hence the commitment by Jim Wallace , head of the Australian Christian Lobby , to make people understand that laws for gay marriage will crush conscientious objection by parents who oppose the promotion of homosexual behaviour to schoolchildren. Wallace wrote here last December: "If our schools are concerned about discouraging smoking for its seven to 10-year shortening of life, how can we in all honesty encourage a lifestyle for men that shortens it on average by double that?" But when he made similar comments last week in a debate with Christine Milne , the Greens reported him to the Human Rights Commission and Julia Gillard cancelled h

THE Left knows a great a prize is within its grasp: any law redefining marriage will mandate the new definition with the full force of anti-discrimination law , thus completing the 1960s sexual revolution. Hence the commitment by Jim Wallace , head of the Australian Christian Lobby , to make people understand that laws for gay marriage will crush conscientious objection by parents who oppose the promotion of homosexual behaviour to schoolchildren. Wallace wrote here last December: "If our schools are concerned about discouraging smoking for its seven to 10-year shortening of life, how can we in all honesty encourage a lifestyle for men that shortens it on average by double that?" But when he made similar comments last week in a debate with Christine Milne , the Greens reported him to the Human Rights Commission and Julia Gillard cancelled her speech on "religious freedom in a secular society" to the ACL conference . Wallace's figures are sound: a 20-year loss

A prominent Timaru priest has said he could never marry a gay couple. If he did, he feared he might face excommunication from the church. Sacred Heart Basilica parish priest Father Peter Costello was reacting to the news that Louisa Wall's Marriage Amendment Bill had passed its first reading in Parliament. Opinions have been divided over the consequences for clergy if the bill comes into law. Family First-commissioned expert Ian Bassett said earlier in the week that if passed into law, clergy who refused to marry same-sex couples could be criminalised. But the Human Rights Commission has said churches will still be allowed to refuse to marry anyone, including same-sex couples, without legal ramifications. Father Costello hopes he will be able to refuse gay marriages. "It is never a universal human right to be married," he said. "The [Catholic] church would say that love and friendship exist for everyone, but only the bond between a male and a female is recognised in

Image via Wikipedia The Human Rights Commission says the case for same-sex marriage was also strong. Would you say then that the Federal Government by not endorsing same-sex marriage is out of step with public opinion ? PUBLIC OPINION WANTS TO ENDORSE SIN CATHERINE BRANSON : Well certainly what we heard from the people that we consulted with is that it's an important aspect of equality for them. This consultation didn't purport to be a sound survey of the Australian population . But there is growing evidence that a very significant proportion of the Australian population agrees. WHO SUPPLIED THE EVIDENCE OF SUPPORT? Submissions to the consultation also showed support for marriage equality as an important step towards full equality for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex people. ANSWER: Gays or Marriage Equality Group, not the population.  150 received comments. 97 attended roundtable discussion in both Sydney and Melbourne and the majority were pro-ga