GAY TRUTH

A florist who refused to create floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding will appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court after a Washington state court ruled Thursday that she violated the state’s civil rights law. The case presents the high court with an opportunity to decide whether conservative religious believers can use the First Amendment as a defense against laws requiring accommodation of LGBT people, a question the justices ducked in the 2018 Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling. “I could lose my business and life savings simply because I declined to celebrate and participate in a sacred event that violates my faith,” the florist, Barronelle Stutzman, said following Thursday’s decision. “No artist or creative professional should be forced by the government to create custom work that conflicts with their deeply held beliefs. That’s why I will appeal my case to the U.S. Supreme Court.” State prosecutors filed a consumer protection lawsuit against Stutzman, who owns and operates Arlene’

Toronto police have issued a Canada-wide warrant on charges of inciting hatred for a Christian who handed out flyers at the 2016 Toronto Pride Parade warning of the spiritual and biological dangers of sodomy. Bill Whatcott announced on the Free North America portal he intends to turn himself into the Calgary police on Friday, June 22 at 10:00 a.m. Toronto 51 Division is charging Whatcott with the indictable offence of inciting hatred under Section 391 of Canada’s Criminal Code. “The ‘crime’? My ministry bringing the Gospel and the truth about homosexuality to Toronto’s homosexual pride parade in 2016,” Whatcott wrote on Free North America. Constable Caroline de Kloet, media relations officer for Toronto Police Service, said the charges arose from a two-year investigation into a complaint the police received in 2016, but that police don’t give out “victim information.” The Toronto police were in contact the federal attorney general on the case, as is the procedure with hate crimes.

Next Tuesday , a courageous and faithful Christian , Jack Phillips , will finally have his day in court to fight for his right to uphold his beliefs about God, about marriage and about fairness. Jack is a Christian baker and artist who has served his community in Colorado for over two decades, using his work to highlight his belief in God and the goodness of Jesus Christ . When asked by a gay couple to design a cake to celebrate their same-sex 'wedding,' Jack politely declined due to his religious beliefs , but offered to help the couple find another baker to assist them. Instead, the couple filed a complaint with the state of Colorado , which ruled he was guilty of "discrimination" and ordered him to start celebrating gay weddings, undergo a reeducation program and file quarterly compliance reports! We’ve produced an important new video that explains the critical nature of Jack's case, which is now before the US Supreme Court . Please watch it and then share

The Marriage Act provides that a minister of religion that's registered under a particular denomination is able to refuse to solemnise a marriage for any reason. So if a pastor in Mount Isa was registered as part of a denomination which is registered under the Marriage Act, they could refuse to solemnise a same-sex marriage , and they wouldn't be able to be sued for the discrimination. In section 47 of the Marriage Act it says 'Nothing imposes an obligation on an authorised celebrant, being a minister of religion, to solemnise any marriage. This protection did not extend to independent marriage celebrants, who could not rely on their attachment to a registered denomination under the Marriage Act. If an independent civil celebrant had their own particular religious convictions but weren't officially attached to a recognised denomination, if they refuse to solemnise a same-sex marriage, they wouldn't be protected by the Marriage Act and under the current

English: The Supreme Court of the United States. Washington, D.C. Français : La Cour suprême des États-Unis. Washington D.C., États-Unis. ‪Norsk (bokmål)‬: Høyesterett i USA. Washington, D.C. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) A Texas   lawsuit  supported by the Texas administration including Governor Gregg Abbott, argues that despite the Supreme Court ruling of 2015, no city or state is required to provide same-gender partner benefits even though they must allow for same-gender marriages. Commonsense. The state Supreme Court heard arguments in this case on Wednesday, March 1, but this has got people asking what actually was the Supreme Court ruling of 2015, what did it say, and can states deny same-gender partnership benefits? Obergefell v. Hodges: Where the historic case began Following the 2013 Supreme Court decision that overturned part of the federal ban on same-gender marriage recognition known as DOMA , Ohio resident James Obergefell and his terminally ill partner Jo

Despite being proud of advances they’ve made during eight years under President Barack Obama, leaders of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender movement say they still have work to do. “The future of the LGBT movement hinges largely on the outcome of this election,” Kevin Jennings, executive director of the  Arcus Foundation , said at a global LGBT summit held in Philadelphia during the Democratic National Convention.  Jennings, issuing a warning to a mostly friendly audience, said there are “two very different visions for LGBT equality in the Republican and Democratic platforms.” More than 25 prominent leaders of the national LGBT movement, including elected officials and other influential voices, gathered for the four-day event called the  Equality Forum .  The Daily Signal attended several panel discussions featuring speakers such as Janson Wu, executive director of the advocacy group  GLAD ; James Esseks, director of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and AIDS 

Liberty Counsel filed a motion for summary judgment in a lawsuit filed by Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) against Pastor Scott Lively, in which SMUG seeks to silence and impose significant financial penalties against Lively for speech about homosexuality in Uganda. The motion contains 198 pages of facts and legal argument. In the suit, SMUG alleges that Lively committed "crimes against humanity" in violation of "international law"—akin to genocide and war crimes—by simply sharing his biblical views on homosexuality during three visits to Uganda in 2002 and 2009. The suit makes the sensational claim that Lively's visits were part of a "conspiracy" to "persecute" the LGBTI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex) population of Uganda. SMUG alleged Lively orchestrated rampant "discrimination" and even violence against the LGBTI community, leading to the death of SMUG leader David Kato. Four years, 100 hours of depositions, a