GAY TRUTH

Grandmother Barronelle Stutzman , the Washington State florist found guilty of violating the state’s antidiscrimination law by refusing to provide flowers for a homosexual couple’s wedding, is appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court . Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, filed her petition with the high court Friday. She is represented by the Alliance Defending Freedom. The Washington State Supreme Court in February unanimously upheld the Benton County Superior Court’s ruling that this grandmother violated state law by refusing to bullied into providing floral arrangements for the immoral wedding of openly gay and aggressive Ingersoll and Freed in 2013. The government then threatened her business and chose to bully her as an example and fined her $1,000.  Grandmother Stutzman has said her refusal was based on her Christian beliefs about marriage, not antigay animus, and that the state court rulings violate her freedom of speech and religion. “Rob Ingersoll and I ha

English: Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) As one of the four justices that dissented from today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling declaring that all 50 states must legalize same-sex “marriage, Justice Antonin Scalia issued a sharp rebuke of his colleagues’ arrogance, warning that “pride goeth before a fall.” “The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic,” he wrote. “It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances, even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the court to do so.” Scalia was speaking of his disapproval of five black-robed justices issuing an edict that he opined was “highly unrepresentative” of the nation and “hardly a cross-section of America .” “Today’s decree says that my ruler, and the ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine

English: Angry woman. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) As  I recounted Monday at The Daily Signal , The New York Times reporter Josh Barro thinks some people are “unworthy of respect.” Yesterday Barro doubled-down and tweeted back at me that “some people are deserving of incivility.” He argued that I am such a person because of my views about marriage policy. You can see the entire exchange  on my twitter page . What Josh Barro says or does doesn’t really affect me. I’m not a victim, and I’ll keep doing what I do. But incivility, accepted and entrenched, is toxic to a political community. Indeed, civility is essential for political life in a pluralistic society. It also has deep roots. The Hebrew Bible tells us that all people are made in the image and likeness of God and have a profound and inherent dignity. Sound philosophy comes to a similar conclusion: as rational beings capable of freedom and love, all human beings have intrinsic and inestimable worth. And so we should al

February 26, 2014 ( Heritage ) - Yet another judge  has struck down a state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman . These rulings claim that the equal protection of the law requires the redefinition of marriage . It does not. State laws that reflect  the truth about marriage should be ruled constitutional . U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia discarded the votes of  76 percent of Texans  as he  struck down   Texas ’s 2005 constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of man and woman. In his opinion for the court, Garcia  claims  that the “court decision is not made in defiance of the great people of Texas or the Texas Legislature, but in compliance with the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedent.” He added that “without a rational relation to a legitimate governmental purpose, state-imposed inequality can find no refuge in our U.S. Constitution.” But this appeal to inequality fails to address the question of what marri

Days from now, our country will be celebrating an America that its founders would barely recognize. Freedom, Alexis de Tocqueville once said, requires virtue. Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court made it clear that the pillars of both are under attack. By a single vote, five unelected justices determined that they know better than God and struck at the heart of marriage in America. It was a powerful rebuke of a law FRC helped develop, the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) -- but not the final blow. To the disappointment of many, this was not the sweeping nationwide redefinition of marriage that homosexual activists were hoping for. Instead, the Court's majority decided that the federal law is unconstitutional in states where same-sex "marriage" is legal. There, couples will have full access to the 1,100 federal benefits, rights, and protections that naturally married spouses enjoy. While it wasn't a complete dismantling of marriage, the Court's ruling paves

"Who gave America the right to define marriage" God. Observers of the Supreme Court believe the nine justices will not impose a legally binding redefinition of marriage on all 50 states, because they expressed uncertainty about the effects same-sex “marriage” has on children and society. However, California's Proposition 8 , the state constitutional amendment that defines marriage as a union between one man and one woman, may still be struck down. The High Court heard oral arguments yesterday into the constitutionality of Proposition 8 as thousands gathered outside on both sides of the issue. Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage has said  more than 10,000   Americans attended the  first-ever March for Marriage . The oral arguments themselves were filled to capacity, withe scalpers reselling the free tickets for up to  $6,000 apiece. Redefining marriage “may turn out to be a good thing; it may turn out not to be a good thing,” said Justice