GAY TRUTH

The European Court of Justice will decide if the "marriage" of two homosexuals will be recognized throughout all EU member states , regardless of nations that still maintain that marriage is exclusively between a man and a woman. The  case  before the court hinges on the definition of the word “spouse.” Homosexuals Adrian Coman and Clai Hamilton were “wed” in Belgium in 2010 and now live in the United States . But now Coman wants his home country of Romania to recognize his same-sex “marriage” so that he and his partner can immigrate there and receive the social benefits of a normal married couple.  But the Romanian Constitutional Court, instead of solving the matter itself, voted by a majority of seven to two to refer the matter for a preliminary ruling to the European Court of Justice.  Normally interpreted to mean husband and wife, activists hope that judges in the EU ’s Court of Justice (EUCJ) will  broadly interpret the word  "spouse" ...

ROME,  – A court in the Tuscan city of Grosseto has ordered the city council to accept the “marriage” of two men, the first time such a union has been given juridical recognition in Italy . Giancarlo Cerrelli, vice president of the Catholic Lawyer’s Guild, says the ruling is a “creative judgment that takes no account of the Civil Code and the jurisprudence of the European Union .” Two homosexual men, Giuseppe Chigiotti and Stefano Bucci, contracted a legal “marriage” ceremony in New York in December last year, then returned to Italy and filed a suit against the town of Grosseto in an attempt to force the issue through the courts. The method has been highly successful in most jurisdictions around the western world, where courts in Canada, the US, Britain, Australia, and across Europe have been used by homosexual activists to overturn laws defining natural marriage. Despite what some media outlets have claimed, however, both legal experts and homosexual activists ...

A Christian doctor struck off an adoption panel for her views on homosexuality is petitioning to have her case heard in the European Court of Justice . Dr Sheila Matthews, a paediatrician, was dismissed from Northamptonshire Council Adoption Panel, after she asked to abstain from voting on the placement of children with homosexual couples because it went against her professional and Christian beliefs that it is in the best interests of a child to be placed with a father and mother, rather than a homosexual couple. Although she was partially reinstated in her job following outcry over the council’s decision, she was no longer allowed to continue as a full member of the adoption panel, a move which prompted her to resign in March this year. Christian Concern , which is backing her case, said Dr Matthews had effectively been “excluded” from practising her vocation because of her Christian views and her professional judgement. She is going before an Employment Tribunal in Leicester ...

WASHINGTON, D.C. , March 21, 2013 ( Heritage Foundation ) - If the Supreme Court justices —wrongly—look to foreign law to resolve the question of whether marriage may be defined as the union of one man and one woman, they will discover that the traditional definition of marriage is almost universally followed. An  amicus brief filed with the Court  by a group of international jurists and academics makes just that case. These scholars point out that not until the year 2000 did any political body recognize same-sex unions as marriages, and even today only 12 jurisdictions outside the United States do so. They argue that “same-sex marriage is not required by international human rights norms”: The European Court of Justice , the European Court of Human Rights , the United Nations Human Rights Committee , the French Constitutional Court, the Italian Constitutional Court , the German Federal Constitutional Court , and the New Zealand Court of Appeal have all rejected t...

WASHINGTON, D.C. , March 14, 2013, ( Heritage Foundation ) - Scholars have filed more than 50 amicus briefs with the Supreme Court urging it to uphold California’s Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). While the media seems intent on ignoring these briefs and  hyping the briefs on the other side , the sheer number and quality of the briefs in defense of laws recognizing marriage as the union of a man and a woman is impressive. Austin Nimocks, Senior Counsel at the  Alliance Defending Freedom , explains the significance: During the Supreme Court’s 2011-2012 term, an average of only 10 amicus briefs per case were filed. And in the historic landmark case of  Roe v. Wade , only 26 total amicus briefs were filed. By comparison a combined total of 58 amicus briefs were filed in support of Prop 8 and DOMA. The pro-marriage arguments are deep, rich, well-reasoned, common sense- and common good-based, and worthy of serious reflection by the Cour...