GAY TRUTH

In a new film that will premier in North America Sunday but premiered in Rome today, Pope Francis has made his most clear   statements contradicting Catholic Church teaching   by calling for homosexual civil unions to be legalized. Speaking of homosexual civil unions, he said, “What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered. I stood up for that.”  One does not have to be a theologian or a moral expert to know that such statements are totally heterodox and constitute a very serious cause of scandal for the faithful.' Archbishop Vigano has replied with an extensive analysis of the situation . In addition, U.S. bishops Joseph Strickland and Thomas Tobin have commented. It is not the first time Pope Francis has contravened Church teaching in the matter of homosexuality, but it is one of his clearest statements contravening established Church teaching. In 2003, in a document by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) and approved and ordered pu

In the documentary, which premiered in Rome today, Pope Francis has made his most clear statements contradicting Catholic Church teaching by calling for homosexual civil unions to be legalized . Speaking of homosexual civil unions, he said “What we have to create is a civil union law. That way they are legally covered. I stood up for that.”  The film Francesco is a fawning and dramatic treatment of Pope Francis, painting the pontiff as a liberator of humanity pushing on many of the hot-button issues. Pope promotes what the Bible prohibits It is not the first time Pope Francis has contravened Church teaching in the matter of homosexuality, but it is one of his clearest statements contravening established Church teaching. In 2003, in a document by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) and approved and ordered published by Pope St. John Paul II, the Church issued specific guidance on the need to reject homosexual civil union proposals.  The document called “Considerations reg

Justice Clarence Thomas, joined by Justice Samuel Alito, lashed out on Monday at the religious liberty implications of the Supreme Court's 2015 decision that cleared the way for same-sex marriage nationwide. Thomas wrote that the decision, Obergefell v. Hodges, "enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss." Thomas' strong opinion came down on the first day of the court's new term and reflects the fact that critics of the landmark opinion from five years ago that was penned by now-retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, are still infuriated by its reasoning. They believe the court should have left the decision to the political arena and have long said that it will infringe upon the rights of those who have religious objections to same-sex marriage. Supporters of LGBTQ rights are fearful that the court is poised to contin

Päivi Räsänen, a member of the Finnish parliament and former government minister, was summoned to a police interrogation – again. The answers she gave at 10am on 25 August 2020 at the police station of Pasila (Helsinki) was the third time she had to respond to the police because of suspicion of agitation against immoral homosexuality , which is now a crime that according to the Penal Code of Finland could lead to a prison sentence of up to two years. Gays can lie and trick and fool you into prison. It was one more step in the case opened against her by the Prosecutor General of Finland in pre-trial investigations that started in 2019, when Räsänen posted a Bible verse about homosexuality with a personal message on her social media accounts in which she criticized the fact that the Finnish Lutheran Church had openly supported the country’s LGBTQ Pride events. A radio talk show This time, the politician of the Christian Democratic Party had to give explanations about her remarks in a ta

Back in May, I wrote a column for First Things on the ongoing persecution of Finnish politician Päivi Räsänen, who has been consistently targeted over the past several years by LGBT activists for her outspoken advocacy of biblical sexual ethics. Since I interviewed her last, she has been interrogated by Finnish police yet again—simply for articulating her Christian beliefs in public.  Räsänen is not an insignificant figure in Finland. From 2004 to 2015, she served as chair for the Christian Democrats, and from June 2011 to May 2015 she was Minister for the Interior of Finland. Her husband is a Lutheran pastor, and her Christian views were well-known. Not until Section 10 of Finland’s Criminal Code dealing with hate speech was amended in 2011 to include “sexual orientation” did she run into any trouble.  Suddenly, the expression of orthodox Christian views held by countless millions could possibly consider hate speech, and perhaps even prosecutable. That, at least, is what Räsänen’s per

SCHOOLYARD FIGHT - JUSTICES FAIL THE PEOPLE WITH WISDOM When the Supreme Court extended the 1964 Civil Rights Act to gay and lesbian workers in a June ruling, the justices also protected transgender employees but made it open season on all religious people, religious bodies, and any individual who don't bow to LGBT tyranny. They made a grave error and betrayed common sense by bowing to the extreme voices and pressure of LGBT zealots who are also some Supreme justices.  THE ERRORS MADE WILL ENFLAME LGBT ZEALOTS But the case did not start out that way. In their private conference room in October with only the nine and no law clerks, the justices debated whether and how to provide the same anti-bias coverage for 1 million transgender workers, according to multiple sources familiar with the inner workings of the court. THE ERRORS MADE WILL BURN RELIGIOUS FREEDOMS Some justices raised concerns related to religious interests and shared bathrooms, the sources said. But even

In what dissenting Justice Samuel Alito called one of the most “brazen abuse[s]” of the Supreme Court’s authority, a six-member majority of the court led by Justice Neil Gorsuch has rewritten Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of “sex.” Why bother trying to pass the proposed Equality Act when you can get the justices to make law for you? Title VII prohibits an employer from failing or refusing “to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual … because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”  Gorsuch — joined by the four liberal justices, along with Chief Justice John Roberts — decided that employment decisions that take any account of an employee’s sexual orientation or gender identity necessarily entail discrimination based on sex in violation of Title VII.  A Giant Leap In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, which was combine

One review summarizes the film: 'As he frantically tries to hide the evidence of his relationship from his mom ... he quickly learns that maybe there's nothing to hide after all.' Pixar featured its first homosexual main character in a new short film, “Out.” The film tells the story of a young man revealing to his parents that he is in a homosexual relationship. Disney’s streaming service Disney+ announced the short film as “[t]he latest heartwarming tale” on Twitter. The trailer shows the main character, Greg, looking at a picture of himself standing beside another man practicing telling his parents of his homosexuality. “Just look them in the eyes and say, ‘Mom, Dad, I’m…,’” he says, as the doorbell rings and his parents walk in. According to  E ntertainment Weekly , “[w]ith a little nudge in the right direction from a pair of fairy god-pets — a magically fabulous dog and cat who ride in on a rainbow — Greg swaps bodies with his dog, Jim. As he f

When Rachel Colvin, a teacher at Ballarat Christian College, refused to sign a new statement of faith that had been strengthened following the same-sex marriage plebiscite, she set in train an anti-discrimination case which captures the issues at the heart of Australia’s religious discrimination debate. She should have stood down immediately. But she aligned herself with people who are clearly anti-God and anti-scripture while still claiming to be a Christian.  The school’s new statement says  “God designed the two genders, male and female, for the purpose of joy and procreation within the sole relationship of marriage. So marriage can only be between a male and a female, and upon this foundation alone should children be conceived and families formed.”  Although a very liberal Christian, Colvin disagreed. She should have withdrawn and walked away instead she chose to go with the immoral culture and not scripture and embarrass a Christian school. Lovely. Rachel Colvin cla