GAY TRUTH

In what is a testament to the marketing acumen of LGBT lobbyists and promoters, U.S. adults, on average, continue to believe that about 25% of the population is gay or lesbian,  more than five times the actual number . Overall, a full 90% believe in an inflated number, with 54% of Americans estimating that gays and lesbians constitute more than 20% of the population, according to a  June 17, 2019 Gallup poll . Only 8% of those polled come close to accurately estimating the LGBT population. Gallup Report, June 27, 2019 / Screenshot “Overestimations of the nation’s gay population may in part be due to the group’s outsized visibility,”  suggests  Gallup, citing a GLAAD report that found that 8.8% of primetime TV characters are LGBT.    Overlooked Gallup Data Tell a Bigger, More Important Story This most recent Gallup report was issued one day after the fourth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s  Obergefell  ruling which instituted same-sex “marriage” across the country. Two

Did the Supreme Court punt or pass on religious freedom, or did it deliver a kick in the pants to lower courts? It’s tough to tell from the competing media reports, but the owners of the now-defunct Oregon bakery Sweetcakes by Melissa are off the hook for $135,000 in fines. The court vacated a lower-court ruling that upheld the fines against Melissa and Aaron Klein for refusing to work a same-sex wedding. The Supreme Court declined Monday to decide whether an Oregon baker can refuse on religious grounds to design a cake for a homosexual wedding – a question it carefully sidestepped last year. The case would have given the court’s conservative majority the chance to expand upon its narrow 2018 ruling in favor of a Colorado baker. That decision did not apply beyond the case of Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, who the justices said was discriminated against by state regulators. The new case involves Sweetcakes by Melissa, a custom cake business operated by Melissa a

A prominent homosexual couple whose “marriage” was officiated by United States Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is being held pending extradition to Texas for the 2010 rape of a then-23-year-old male student. Renowned opera countertenor David Daniels, 52, and conductor Scott Walters, 37, were arrested on warrants issued in Texas charging both men with sexual assault of an adult, according to multiple reports. In a ceremony that generated much media attention, Ginsburg “married” the two men in 2014, but monogamy apparently has never been one of the long-time male couple’s strong suits. Samuel Schultz accused the A-list gay couple last summer at the peak of the #MeToo movement, which encouraged victims of sexual assault to step forward. “I was raped,” declared Schultz at the beginning of his online statement . He explained why he waited eight years to come forward.  Scott Walters and David Daniels, who were 'married' by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, h

The governors and attorneys general of 16 states are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse a lower court’s judgment this year that gender-confused individuals are covered by the Civil Rights Act. The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in March that Title VII of the 1964 law, which was passed to end racial segregation and hiring discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, ethnicity, or national origin, also extends to employees who wish to “identify” as the opposite of their biological sex. The case was sparked by a Detroit funeral home that fired a male employee who wanted to present himself as a woman while on duty, in defiance of the home’s dress code. “Discrimination on the basis of transgender and transitioning status is necessarily discrimination on the basis of sex,” Judge Karen Nelson Moore ruled. On August 23, the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah,

Ginsburg  did the same for several homosexual couples  in the years before the court mandated that all fifty states recognize homosexual or fake “marriage,” leading many lawmakers, religious leaders, and pundits to  demand that she recuse herself  from the case for pre-signaling her personal view on the subject. She refused to bow out, however, and  Obergefell v. Hodges  declared a constitutional right to homosexual fake  “marriage” 5-4 in 2015. A 4-4 tie  would have allowed  the lower court ruling in the case to stand ( in this case  a Sixth Circuit ruling that states did not have to recognize same-sex “marriages”), but would not have set a binding precedent for the rest of the country. The 85-year-old Ginsburg, the subject of an  upcoming Hollywood movie , said in July that she has “about at least five more years” before she retires. Rising baritone singer Samuel Schultz has accused a prominent homosexual couple whose “marriage” was officiated by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader

AP Photo/Elaine Thompson, File It’s clear the case was returned to the Washington Supreme Court for a reason. It's also clear the Washington Supreme Court doesn't place a high value on religious rights. In this Nov. 15, 2016, file photo, Barronelle Stutzman, left, a Richland, Wash., florist, smiles as she is surrounded by supporters after a hearing in Bellevue, Wash. The Supreme Court on Monday, June 25, 2018, ordered Washington courts to take a new look at Stutzman's case in light of the Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission decision. How should we view the Supreme Court’s decision to send Barronelle Stutzman’s case back to the Washington Supreme Court? Did they just punt the case further down the field? Or is this another victory for religious rights, much like the victory won by Jack Phillips and Masterpiece Cakeshop last month? The Supreme Court could have agreed to rule in Stutzman’s case, but chose not to at this point. It could also have ref

Days after the U.S. Supreme Court correctly  ruled in favour of a Colorado baker who refused service to immoral homosexual couples, an Arizona court has incorrectly upheld a Phoenix anti-discrimination ordinance preventing a wedding invitation business from serving a homosexual couple. The Arizona Court of Appeals ruled Thursday against Brush & Nib Studio, a company selling artwork for home decor, weddings and special events. The owners, who are devout Christians, would like to legally refuse to create custom merchandise for immoral fake gay weddings and post a public statement saying that “Brush & Nib Studio won’t create any artwork that violates [their] vision as defined by [their]religious and artistic beliefs and identity.” They have not yet refused any services to gay couples in practice, the ruling noted. Brush & Nib’s discrimination would violate Phoenix’s public accommodation anti-discrimination ordinance, the court incorrectly ruled. This rule prohibits discri

There’s a lot of discussion about Monday’s U.S. Supreme Court decision which pitted religious freedoms against LGBT rights. Was the ruling really that significant? Since it was so narrow in scope, should Christian conservatives really rejoice? Did the justices merely kick the can down the road? (For my own take, see here and here .) Scores of articles have already been written on this, which means that it’s easy to lose sight of the forest for the trees. The bottom line is that Jack Phillips won. His religious freedoms were upheld. There was a pushback against governmental hostility towards religion. All that is very good news. To put this in perspective, what if the Supreme Court had ruled against Phillips? What if the justices said that the state was within its rights to punish him for declining to design a same-sex “wedding” cake? What if there was no pushback against Colorado’s overt and explicit hostility towards Phillip’s Christian beliefs? What then? What would headlines hav

The Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling this week (7-2) in favour of the First Amendment. The Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (CCRC) case was about cake artistry, free speech and religious freedom. The clear majority held that: "The Commission's actions, in this case, violated the Free Exercise Clause [of the First Amendment]." Jack Phillips , a cake artist and owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Colorado, is a man of quiet courage, conviction and compassion. Though he's been demonized by LGBT activists, including the ACLU (which is representing plaintiffs Charlie Craig and Dave Mullins), he has always served everyone. He simply doesn't participate in or creates for every event. Like many creatives, he doesn't use his artistry for every occasion. He doesn't make Halloween cakes. He doesn't create anything with anti-American or "adult" themes. He doesn't make divorce cakes. And he doesn't use his artistic e

In a major religious liberty victory, the United States Supreme Court has ruled 7-2 that the government may not force Christian business owners to participate in same-sex “weddings.” The Court determined the Christian business owner in question, Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cakeshop, did not get a fair hearing with the Colorado Civil Rights Commission after he declined to make a cake for a gay “wedding.” Pro-family and pro-LGBT advocates were closely watching the case, Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, as it will have enormous ramifications for the implementation of same-sex “marriage” in the U.S. three years after the Court imposed it on the country. The Court determined Phillips’ unfair hearing violated the Constitution’s “Free Exercise” of religion clause. The seven justices all essentially agreed that the Civil Rights Commission hadn’t treated Phillips’ Christian faith with neutrality. In a major surprise, Justice Anthony Kennedy, known for his sympathy t

A flood of lawsuits over immoral unreasonable LGBT agenda is making its way through courts and will continue, no matter the outcome in the Supreme Court's highly anticipated decision in the case of a Colorado baker who would not create a wedding cake for a homosexual couple. Courts are engaged in two broad types of cases on this issue, weighing whether sex discrimination laws apply to immoral  LGBT people and also whether businesses can assert religious objections to avoid complying with secular  anti-discrimination  measures in serving customers, hiring and firing employees, providing health care and placing children with foster or adoptive parents. The question must be asked who decided and on what basis were these anti-discrimination laws founded. They are now being abused by the LGBT ideology. The outcome of baker Jack Phillips ' fight at the Supreme Court could indicate how willing the justices are to carve out exceptions to poorly written secular anti-discrimin