GAY TRUTH

U.S. Supreme Court, 1998. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The U.S. Supreme Court announced that it will take on the issue of transgender bathrooms being forced upon the nation's schoolchildren. The country's highest court will hear an appeal next year from the Gloucester County School Board in Virginia on Caitlyn Hope Grimm's lawsuit to use the boys’ showers, toilets, and locker rooms at school. "This is the first time that the Court will be addressing the question of whether laws protecting against sex discrimination in education are applicable to ' gender identity ,'” Liberty Counsel   noted . Caitlyn, a 17-year-old suffering from gender dysphoria, began to self-identify as a boy in 2014. She has not undergone sex "change" surgery, but she has legally changed her name to "Gavin" and begun taking hormones to give her a deeper voice. When Caitlyn began using the boys' restroom at school, some parents voiced their concern. The

U.S. Supreme Court building. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that the state of Virginia does not have to begin sanctioning same-sex “marriages.” The stay comes after a panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 to  strike down the state's constitutional marriage protection amendment . The appeals court refused to grant a stay until the Supreme Court decided the case, a decision that would have forced Virginia clerks to begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples  starting this week . However, one such clerk, Michele B. McQuigg , petitioned Chief Justice John Roberts to grant a stay. The order was allowed without dissent. “This is another indication that the rush to judgment declaring marriage to be unconstitutional is not only premature, but incorrect,” said Brian Brown, president of the  National Organization for Marriage . “The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that states have the right to define marri

Map of the geographic boundaries of the various United States Courts of Appeals and United States District Courts. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) On Monday a divided three-judge panel of the  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in Richmond upheld a federal district court ’s decision from February 2014 declaring Virginia ’s male-female marriage definition to be unconstitutional. In  Bostic v. Schaeffer , the Court of Appeals ruled that Virginia’s “ Marriage Laws ,” including its electorally-enacted constitutional provision defining marriage, “warrant strict scrutiny due to their infringement of the fundamental right to marry.” Upon further analysis the court’s majority opinion, written by Judge Henry Floyd and joined by Judge Roger Gregory , concluded that these marital provisions were not supported by a sufficiently strong rationale to withstand heightened constitutional scrutiny. The key fighting ground between the court’s majority and the dissenter, Judge Paul Niemeyer,