GAY TRUTH

West Australian Labor senator Joe Bullock has announced his shock decision to quit parliament less than two years into his six-year term, saying he could not remain a member of a party that would force him to support gay marriage. Senator Bullock, an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage, will leave Parliament within weeks. Openly gay former WA senator Louise Pratt will nominate for the vacancy. The Labor party now is filling with immoral homosexual crusaders bent on destroying traditional marriage and forcing Christian Churches to marry homosexuals. Senator Bullock, 60, told the Senate his resignation was caused by the decision at last year’s ALP conference to require Labor MPs to support same sex marriage by removing a conscience vote . He said he walked away from the conference “shocked and alone”. “How can I in good conscience recommend to people that they vote for a party which is determined to deny its parliamentarians a conscience vote on the homosexual marriage qu

NEW YORK CITY , – Donald Trump donated $30,000 to homosexual activists, including a $20,000 grant to an organization that promoted "fisting" to middle school students, recommended books excusing homosexual pedophilia, and proclaimed its mission is "promoting homosexuality" in the public schools to children as early as kindergarten. According to a 990 form filed with the IRS, the Donald J. Trump Foundation donated $20,000 to the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) in 2012 and another $10,000 to Gay Men's Health Crisis . Kevin Jennings founded GLSEN (originally the Gay and Lesbian School Teachers Network ) in 1990. He and other homosexual teachers formed Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) nationwide and drew up curricula that began shaping children's values in accordance with the LGBT perspective from the age of five. Kindergarten should be the “saturation period” for LGBT views GLSEN has been upfront about its goals and desire fo

A Tasmanian woman (transgender - Green Candidate for Federal Parliament)  is taking the Catholic Archbishop of Hobart to the Anti-Discrimination Commission over the contents of a booklet sent to Catholics around Australia earlier this year about same-sex marriage. Here, Associate Professor of Law, Neil Foster examines the basis of the claim. There are press reports (see also here ) that the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Hobart is being sued under s 17 of Tasmania’s Anti-Discrimination Act 1998 for causing “offence” or “humiliation”. This was alleged to have been done by the Archbishop causing to be sent to Roman Catholic schools in his diocese, a booklet outlining the church views on marriage, and in particular expressing the well-known opposition of the church to the introduction of same sex marriage. A copy of the booklet, “Don’t Mess with Marriage”, can be downloaded here . It seems clear but also very respectful, and keen to condemn any ill-treatment of those with a same

A news story in The Australian this morning indicates that the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission has found a preliminary “case to answer” in relation to a claim of sexual orientation discrimination against not only the Archbishop of Hobart , Julian Porteous, but also “all Australia ’s Catholic bishops.” We have known for some time that Greens political candidate Martine ­Delaney had made a complaint against Archbishop Porteous, but the additional feature of the decision of the Anti-Discrimination Commission is the inclusion of other Catholic Bishops from all around Australia. The booklet distributed to parents of students at Roman Catholic schools by Archbishop Porteous is entitled, “Don’t Mess with Marriage,” and was produced by the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference . The booklet eschews all forms of “unjust discrimination,” and goes on to say, “some suggest that it is unjustly discriminatory not to allow people with same-sex attraction to marry someone of the sam

Freedom of choice. It’s a universally accepted, fundamental rule of civilised society. But which freedom has command over another in the hierarchy of rights? Does freedom of speech outrank freedom of opinion, and are they both junior to freedom of information anyway? And what of religious freedom, the right of individuals and organisations to follow the dictates and teachings of their faith without unfair and unjustified interference? Where does that fall in the freedom pecking order? I ask this in response to another anti-choice offensive from the Greens , this time in Tasmania, questioning the Catholic Church’s ability to reinforce its religious beliefs to families that have made a deliberate choice to educate their children in a Catholic school . The Greens’ anti-discrimination complaint centres on a pastoral letter the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference that I chair asked schools to distribute to parents detailing the church’s position on same-sex marriage. I must note t

President Obama says he backs "The Equality Act ," which would add gender identity and sexual orientation to the 1964 Civil Rights Act. "Upon that review it is now clear that the administration strongly supports the Equality Act,” White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest announced on Tuesday. “That bill is historic legislation that would advance the cause of equality for millions of Americans. “We look forward to working with Congress to ensure that the legislative process produces a result that balances both the bedrock principles of civil rights...with the religious liberty that we hold dear in this country,” said Earnest. The bill was introduced in July in the Senate by Democratic Senators Jeff Merkley of Oregon, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Cory Booker of New Jersey, and in the House by Rep. David Cicilline of Rhode Island. LGBT advocates are praising the bill, which is considered to be a long-shot with GOP control of Congress. The Human Rights Campaign

If passed, the Equality Act would empower the government to discriminate against those who do not accept a sexually permissive understanding of human nature that denies sexual complementarity. Building on the momentum from the Supreme Court’s Obergefell ruling that redefined marriage throughout America , LGBT activists working with Democratic lawmakers have unveiled a new bill titled “ The Equality Act .” The brevity of the bill’s title matches neither its scope nor its impact on federal law and fundamental liberties found in the Constitution. If enacted into law, the Equality Act would further erode religious liberty , transform public opinion on sexuality, and harm the public perception of those who believe in traditional or biblical sexual morality. The bill would create federal anti-discrimination protections on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity in public accommodations, education, employment, and housing. To do so, it would amend the 1964 Civil Rights A