GAY TRUTH

A judge of the Federal Court of Australia , Justice Jagot, handed down a decision recently in which her Honour said that a Tribunal’s reasoning, based on the assumption that a person could never change their sexual orientation , was “affected by illogicality of the kind required to constitute jurisdictional error”- para [15]. The decision, in  Abboud v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection  [2018] FCA 185 (2 March 2018), was a sharp reminder that bureaucratic decisions must be based on evidence and not pre-conceived policy stances. The comments may have wider implications for arguments that are often unthinkingly presented about the possibility of someone changing their sexual orientation. Factual Background The facts of this case at first seem unlikely to raise fundamental issues about human sexuality. Ms Abboud had arrived in Australia on a student visa and over-stayed her visit. Later, however, she married Mr Abboud, who was himself originally from Lebanon , but

In Deuteronomy , Kings, and Job, the Hebrew uses a form of qādēš (“cult prostitute”). The LXX uses a variety of words to translate this one term. Is this a reference to homosexual relations, as in the King James Bible and some other translations, which use the word sodomite? The Revisionist Answer There is no basis for reading homosexual connotations into the concept of “cult prostitute.” The word qādēš does not demand this, and historical records are silent. The word would more likely mean simply a female prostitute who serviced males. The LXX translates the references to “cult prostitute” in such passages by a variety of terms, showing that even these early Jewish scholars were confused as to the meaning of the Hebrew. None of the terms used suggests homosexuality. The LXX and English versions using sodomite are “mistranslations.” The Biblical Answer Context again informs the meaning of the Hebrew word. In Deuteronomy 23:17–18 the text refers explicitly to both female an

Last week the BBC aired a documentary called Transgender Kids: Who Knows Best?  It investigated the best approaches for parents to take if their child has gender-dysphoria issues. It generated immense controversy, not least for featuring the views of Kenneth Zucker (pictured), a doctor considered a leading authority on gender dysphoria until he was fired from Canada ’s largest child gender clinic for allegedly practising conversion therapy. Trans activists were so terrified of what the interviewees in the documentary might say that they started a petition demanding the documentary be shelved until it had been ‘reviewed by experts’. Eleven thousand people signed the petition. ‘No transgender experts in the UK have watched over this programme, which potentially may have a transphobic undertone’, stated Lucas Johnston, creator of the petition.  ‘I have no issue with Dr Zucker having an opinion’, he continued, ‘but I do have an issue when that opinion is being spread on prime time na

The cost of the promised people’s vote on marriage is a reasonable price to pay to settle what has been a long running campaign by activists , according to the Australian Christian Lobby . “Given the relentlessness of those pushing for change, $160 million is a reasonable and necessary price to pay to settle the issue,” ACL Managing Director Lyle Shelton said.  “If marriage is changed there will be profound consequences for children required to miss out on their mother or father and millions of Australians will have to give up rights to freedom of speech, association and religion. “And anyone who thinks that changing the definition of marriage will be the end of rainbow politics, they should think again.  “Next will be a push for commercial surrogacy and mandatory homosexual sex education in schools, something that is already creeping in through the so-called Safe Schools Coalition Australia . “Ever since the peoples’ vote was announced, activists for redefining marriag

speaking at CPAC in Washington D.C. on February 10, 2011. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) The GOP's leading presidential candidate said that he has been to a gay "wedding" and that conservatives should accept the Supreme Court's redefinition of marriage . In a wide-ranging interview with  The Hollywood Reporter , Donald Trump was asked whether the issue of marriage's redefinition is "a dead issue for the GOP at this point." "Some people have hopes of passing amendments [to the U.S. Constitution ]," said Trump, "but it's not going to happen. Congress can't pass simple things, let alone that. So anybody that's making that an issue is doing it for political reasons. The Supreme Court ruled on it." In June, Trump told CNN's Jake Tapper that he had evolved on the issue of marriage , and supports "traditional marriage." At the time, he  was pressed by Tapper  on whether Trump's three marriages underm

Español: Intercambio de anillos entre los novios (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) In light of the   Supreme Court’s decision  earlier this summer, here are six articles from  The Master’s Seminary Journal   that address the issue of homosexuality from a biblical perspective. 1.  God’s Word on Homosexuality: The Truth about Sin and the Reality of Forgiveness Abstract:   Through following a distorted meaning of “love,” some in the present day have condoned homosexual practice, without realizing that biblical love excludes homosexuality because of its sinfulness. Christians can best share the gospel with homosexuals by calling their lifestyle what the Bible calls it—sin. Genesis 1–2, Matthew 19, and Ephesians 5 describe clearly the way that God has instituted marriage as a monogamous, heterosexual relationship. Genesis 19, Jude 7, and 2 Peter 2 illustrate how the Fall almost immediately eroded the purity of human sexuality, including a devastation of the divine institution of marri

Jesus is considered by scholars such as Weber to be an example of a charismatic religious leader. (Photo credit: Wikipedia ) Pro-homosexual activists dismiss the OT prohibition on Homosexuality because it comes from Leviticus where eating certain foods and wearing certain types of clothing were also forbidden in the OT but today are ignored.  Often, pro-homosexual activists dismiss Christians as inconsistent because “they pick and choose which of the rules in the Bible to obey.” The argument proceeds along the lines of, “Christians ignore lots of OT texts—about not eating raw meat or pork or shellfish, not executing people for breaking the Sabbath, not wearing garments woven with two kinds of material, and so on. Aren’t they just picking and choosing what they want to believe from the Bible?” The root of the issue is the perceived inconsistency regarding rules mentioned in the OT that are no longer practiced by the NT people of God . Most Christians don’t know how to respon