GAY TRUTH

Pacs day demonstration to request a Civil Unions Bill in Italy as well. Rome, May 17 2005, photo by Stefano Bolognini. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Philippe Ariño, one of the original initiators of the French “Manif pour tous” rallies against the legalization of same-sex “marriage” in November 2012, is suggesting that opposition to the law and its probable developments needs to be coherent and complete if it hopes to be efficient. In a recent and widely-circulated  article  published on his blog, he writes that the objective must be to put an end to legalized “civil unions” as well. Ariño, a non-practicing homosexual , left the “Manif pour tous” by March 2013, criticizing the movement’s figurehead, Frigide Barjot, for her stands on “homosexual love” and her insistence that civil unions were not only acceptable, but should benefit from a more favorable legal framework. Barjot herself was to be ousted from the organization for the same reason, but the “Manif pour tous” still take

Ignorant of God's law and Christ's prohibition, pride come before a fall. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) BRITISH Prime Minister David Cameron has hailed the first same-sex marriages in England and Wales as sending a “powerful message” about equality. The message is simply we reject Christ and God almighty and the Bible. The law changed on Saturday after midnight, with a number of gay couples vying to claim the title of being the first to be married in Britain by trying to time it perfectly so their vows were said just seconds after the clock struck 12. Using marriage as a form of up your nose we told you so. The prime minister said the reform was necessary because “when people's love is divided by law, it is that law that needs to change”. The PM is however a very confused man when it comes to marriage and love and should stand down immediately. Writing in the gay news service, Pink News , he said “this weekend is an important moment for our country” because “we wil

SACRAMENTO, CA, March 28, 2014  – The backers of a failed statewide petition to place California’s controversial new  transgender law  on the ballot for a public vote have sued the secretary of state and a number of county officials demanding an explanation as to why more than 131,000 signatures were  thrown out  as “invalid” – including the signature of one of the petition’s sponsors. The law in question allows students at California’s public schools to use the bathroom, changing room and other gender-based facilities of their choice, regardless of physical sex.  It also allows boys to participate in girls’ sports and other activities and vice versa, as long as the student says he or she “identifies” as the opposite sex. Privacy for All Students (PFAS), a group based in Chino, collected more than 600,000 signatures on a petition to force the law on the ballot for a chance at repeal by voters.  Only 504,760 were required to force a referendum, but state officials threw out mor

Some have claimed that a bill recently passed by the Arizona legislature would give businesses broad license to not serve someone for being gay. This claim, though, may be a misreading, according a CP legislative analysis. While the bill is an attempt to broaden who is covered under its religious freedom protections, in all cases it actually narrows when a religious belief could be used to refuse service. Here are six important points to understand about the just-passed bill: 1. If Gov. Jan Brewer (R) signs it, the bill, S.B. 1062, would make some modifications to a 1999 Arizona law called the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA). 2. Under current Arizona law, if a business wanted to discriminate against gays, they would not need this bill to be passed to do so. It is not currently illegal for a business to deny service to someone because they are gay. Some cities in Arizona have ordinances against it but there is no state law against it. If business owners in Arizona wanted t

SACRAMENTO , February 25, 2014 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – A California petition drive seeking to put the state’s controversial new ‘choose your own gender’ law on the ballot for possible repeal by voters has failed after the secretary of state determined the referendum’s organizers did not get enough valid signatures to force a public vote. The petition needed 504,760 signatures in order to force a referendum.  Organizers with Privacy for All Students collected over 600,000, but the state threw out 131,857, claiming they were invalid.  The remaining 487,484 signatures fell just 17,276 short of the required goal. But supporters of the referendum say they’re not giving up that easily.  Privacy for All Students co-chairs Gina Gleason and Karen England vowed to insist on a careful review of the rejected signatures, especially in San Diego and San Bernardino Counties, where county officials each threw out 14,000 and 13,000 signatures, respectively.  “I don’t believe all of those

PORTLAND, OR , February 11, 2014– A Portland catering company is being sued for $518,000 by a former employee who alleges her coworkers would not stop referring to her as a woman even after she asked them to stop, reports  The Oregonian . Valeria Jones, the lawsuit’s plaintiff, identifies herself as “gender neutral,” according to the suit.  When she applied to work at the Bon Appetit Management Company , a corporate catering service , she says she purposely left the boxes beside “male” and female” on the application form unchecked, but the company never mentioned the omission.  Jones claims her coworkers repeatedly referred to her as “miss,” “lady,” and “little lady” even after she told them she believes she is “not a female or a male” and asked them to use gender neutral words when speaking to or about her.  According to the suit, her coworkers failed to do so, insisting that she “looked like a woman” and comparing her to a female celebrity whom they believed looked similar

A Lawyer Abandoning His Clients It wasn't really a total surprise when the news came out this week that Virginia's new Attorney General , Mark Herring , has decided not to defend Virginia's marriage law against legal challenge. We've long suspected Herring to be on the side of radical redefinition of marriage , even though he said in his campaign that he would defend the amendment. The headlines nonetheless gave a cold shock. Particularly the one from  USA Today  which read, " Virginia won't defend its same-sex marriage ban. " Well, leaving aside the cynicism or agenda-driven bias that goes into calling laws such as Virginia's marriage amendment "same-sex marriage bans," the headline nonetheless hits upon the real travesty here. Mark Herring is Virginia's Attorney General. He is duty-bound to defend Virginia's laws. Yet here he is, abandoning the people and law of Virginia to pursue his own selfish motives.  The people of Vi