GAY TRUTH

English: The United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the United States, in 2010. Top row (left to right): Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer, Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Bottom row (left to right): Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, and Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) We should have seen it coming. Back in 1989 two young activists pushing for the normalization of homosexuality coauthored a book intended to serve as a political strategy manual and public relations guide for their movement. In After the Ball: How America Will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s, authors Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen argued that efforts to normalize homosexuality and homosexual relationships would fail unless their movement shifted its argument to a demand for civil ri

How did the Defense of Marriage Act end up at the Supreme Court ? It’s because of , an 83-year-old widow and the plaintiff in United States v. Windsor . When Speyer died in 2009, she left her estate to Windsor, who got hit with a $360,000 tax bill. Because of DOMA’s definition of marriage as “a legal union between one man and one woman,” federal tax benefits that shield married couples from the estate tax didn’t apply. This is a taxation issue, not a marriage issue. Just as I feel that those on the right who believe that “marriage equality” is small government are incorrect , I also feel that those who invite government into marriage to “protect” marriage are committing the same big government fallacy. You should be taxed less regardless of whether you’re married, in a civil union , or just taxed less, period. Really this simply underscores how those in the gay community should join the conservative push for lower taxation. Related articles DOMA and Christianity (ecumenica

WASHINGTON, D.C. , March 28, 2013 ( Family Research Council ) - I’ve been going to pro-life marches since 1981, so I’m getting used to the drill. Still, this week’s  March for Marriage  in Washington, D.C. promised to be different in many ways. It was slated to coincide with the  U.S.Supreme Court ’s oral arguments on the Defense of Marriage Act and on California’s Proposition 8 . The media says Prop 8 was designed to “ban” homosexuals from marrying. It was designed for no such thing. As was the federal Defense of Marriage Act , Prop 8 was designed to protect an institution that is under attack. The media puts us in the "anti" position. That’s typical. We’re said to be anti-abortion when we say we are pro-life. We have this odd notion that the child in the womb should not be killed. If we came out against hanging, I guess the media would call us anti-gravity. I arrived early on the Mall for the March, so I ducked into the great red Smithsonian Castle for a cup of coffe

WASHINGTON, D.C. , March 26, 2013 ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – Thousands of Americans from all religions, races, and political parties gathered around the nation as the Supreme Court heard the first of two cases concerning the definition of marriage, with two boisterous and sometimes clashing crowds meeting outside the Supreme Court. (see Media Reseach  video report here )  The March for Marriage traced the streets of D.C., with throngs holding signs that said, “Kids do best with a mom and a dad.” At times, police stood between them and the rowdy supporters of marriage redefinition, who flanked them and shouted at them on either side of the street while holding handmade signs that read, “Go home homophobes, you're all drunk!” As a large group met in the nation's capital, an untold number of others held rallies in San Diego, Salt Lake City, and elsewhere. The two dueling rallies in Washington could scarcely have contrasted any more. At the same time as the March for

Official photographic portrait of US President Barack Obama (born 4 August 1961; assumed office 20 January 2009) (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) WASHINGTON, D.C. , February 28, 2013, ( LifeSiteNews.com ) – President Obama's Justice Department argued that homosexuals do as good a job parenting as heterosexual couples, in a late-breaking  amicus curiae  brief filed with the Supreme Court this afternoon. According to the  legal brief  opposing California's Proposition 8 , the “overwhelming expert consensus,” which is “supported by numerous scientific studies,” is “that children raised by gay and lesbian parents are as likely to be well adjusted as children raised by heterosexual parents.” “The weight of the scientific literature strongly supports the view that same-sex parents are just as capable as opposite-sex parents,” the Obama administration stated. The  amicus  cites a number of studies, as well as policy statements from the  American Academy of Pediatrics , th