Archive for the 'Uncategorized' Category


Gay Rights Activists Outraged Over Billboard’s Message About Homosexuality and Genetics

Tuesday, December 16th, 2014

pfox1cPaid for by Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays — an organization aimed at helping so-called “ex-gays” gain acceptance — the ad features a picture of male twins and reads, “Identical twins. One gay. One not. We believe twins research studies show nobody is born gay.”

While the billboard is offending local gay and lesbian advocates, Regina Griggs, executive director of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays, believes that critics aren’t looking at the facts, specifically when it comes to analyzing how same-sex attraction pertains to twins.

“Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions.  If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay,” she said, according to WVUE-TV. “Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. No one is born gay.

Read here

US: Black pastors’ coalition to file 80 legal briefs opposing same-sex marriage

Wednesday, September 24th, 2014

gavelA coalition of black pastors plans to file 80 legal briefs in same-sex marriage lawsuits across the US.

The National Coalition of Black Pastors and Christian Leaders will file briefs in more than 80 lawsuits across the US, the group announced at a Michigan press conference.

It is partnering with the right-wing Thomas More Law Center in order to file the briefs.

Minister Stacy Swimp said: “We got together and decided there was no way we were going to be silenced when a judge has threatened our holy rights.

“I don’t have to be married to know that without family, society will crumble.

Read here

What is Marriage?

Saturday, August 2nd, 2014

Ryan T Anderson explains to students how marriage contributes to the public good, and how gay marriage – rather than extending that good, as many young people think – actually damages it.

Toxic – gay men and drugs

Monday, July 28th, 2014

drug-abuse1If five years ago I was to predict where I would be on Sunday the 20th of July 2014, I would not have guessed my current situation. Sixteen year old me would have aspired to be waking up next to the love of my life, getting up, making pancakes and walking around London, my new home. While I have moved to London and mastered the art of breakfast, the love of my life I’ve woken up to isn’t a beautiful man, it is a baggie of drugs.

When parents worry that moving to the big city will turn their lovely suburban babies into quivering heroin addicts, they are usually wrong. Scaremongering Daily Mail journalists and vicious rumours circulating among the mums leave them thinking that this is the city with two dealers on every corner. In reality, they have nothing to worry about, unless they have a gay son.

It all started for me about a year and a half ago, when my own worried suburban parents gave me the best Christmas present ever: an iPhone. Immediately upon returning to London, I downloaded Grindr and made up for years of teenage awkwardness by sleeping with about 10 men in a week. Suddenly, I was pretty and popular; this magic orange app had made me a sexual being. After years of feeling inadequate and ugly, here was my chance to live my secret dream of being Samantha Jones.

However, like the Selfridges Boxing Day sale, things quickly spiralled out of control. I got into the habit of sleeping with older men, you could practically smell the daddy issues on me. A couple of weeks in, I went to this guy’s apartment. He was an investment banker for UBS, so my sugar daddy senses were tingling. I went over there wanting rough sex and maybe someone to buy me a Kenzo sweatshirt; all I left with was a taste for mephedrone. I’d dipped my toe in the pool of drugs and the water was just perfect, if you could ignore the body floating face down in the shallow end.

Mephedrone, otherwise known as mkat, meow or confusingly ‘meph’ (not meth) used to be legal and available to buy over the internet in the mid to late 00′s. My hometown in rural England was for a while the world centre of this legal high. My earliest memory of it is at a house party with someone doing a line of it off my mum’s Michael Buble CD. Cringe. Since illegalisation in 2009 it’s gone on to be a £20 a gram class B substance that gets gay men across London ready to party. The high is like MDMA meets cocaine: you’ll dance all night, fall in love with someone, and then want to talk about it endlessly. Other substances that often come up are horse tranquilliser Ketamine and G (GHB/GBL) a liquid used to remove graffiti from concrete. The former brings on waves of hallucinogenic looseness, the latter is taken by the millilitre, mixed with Fanta, and makes the user messily lethargic and very horny.

Read here

 

Relationship problems, not family rejection, leading cause of higher gay suicides: study

Wednesday, June 25th, 2014

gay teenWhile many assume that family rejection is the leading cause of depression among LBGTI individuals, a new study has found that in fact the problem appears to stem predominantly from the higher incidence of relationship problems among homosexuals.

Dr. Delaney Skerrett led a team of researchers from the Australian Institute for Suicide Research and Prevention (AISRAP) in studying suicides in Queensland. He found that a leading cause of suicide among “lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex” (LGBTI) people is stress from their romantic partners.

“We tend to assume that the psychological distress LGBTI people are often going through is due to family rejection. But it seems that’s not so much the case. The conflict seems to be largely related to relationship problems, with partners,” Dr. Skerrett said.

In fact, he said, “The numbers are telling us there’s a general acceptance at the family level,” something he said is “great” and “really heartening!”

Instead, the study, which waspublished on April 2 in Asia Pacific Psychiatry, found that “LGBT individuals experienced relationship problems more often” than heterosexuals, “with relationship conflict also being more frequent than in non‐LGBT cases.”

That confirms previous studies finding that homosexuals also face higher rates of intimate partner violence than heterosexuals. A 2007 study in the Journal of Urban Health, which is published by the New York Academy of Medicine, found that 32 percent of homosexuals have been abused by at least one partner during their lifetime.

Read here

Same Sex Marriage in the Church of England: Back to the good old days

Monday, June 23rd, 2014

By Sam Johnson, English Manif:

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has made what he would like us to think is a profession of continuing support for real marriage. Dated 14th May, and headed “Same-Sex Marriage: Archbishop’s view remains the same”, it goes as follows:

“Lambeth Palace has issued the following statement in response to reports about the Archbishop of Canterbury’s position on same-sex marriage:

The Archbishop has said before that he accepts the right of Parliament to change the law and that the Church should continue to demonstrate the love of Christ for every person. The Archbishop voted against the Same-Sex Marriage Act in the House of Lords last year.”

The skilfully worded statement is curious in a number of respects, not the least being that the first half of the first sentence in the second paragraph implies the Church of England would accept the right of Parliament to pass any legislation whatever, regardless of content or impact, and without recourse to higher, for example moral, standards. According to the second half, the Church will also somehow simultaneously continue passing on the love to everybody, whatever harmful legislation it has accepted and cravenly approved.

It is even more curious and no less craven when you consider the oath the Church’s head, Queen Elizabeth, swore at her coronation almost exactly 62 years ago.

Judge for yourself:

Coronation Oath, 2nd June 1952

Taken from the Order of Service for the Coronation:

The Queen having returned to her Chair, (her Majesty having already on Tuesday, the 4th day of November, 1952, in the presence of the two Houses of Parliament, made and signed the Declaration prescribed by Act of Parliament), the Archbishop standing before her shall administer the Coronation Oath, first asking the Queen,

Madam, is your Majesty willing to take the Oath?

And the Queen answering,

I am willing.

The Archbishop shall minister these questions; and The Queen, having a book in her hands, shall answer each question severally as follows:

  1.  Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Pakistan, and Ceylon, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?
  2.  I solemnly promise so to do.
  3.  Will you to your power cause Law and Justice, in Mercy, to be executed in all your judgements?
  4.  I will.
  5.  Will you to the utmost of your power maintain the Laws of God and the true profession of the Gospel? Will you to the utmost of your power maintain in the United Kingdom the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law? Will you maintain and preserve inviolably the settlement of the Church of England, and the doctrine, worship, discipline, and government thereof, as by law established in England? And will you preserve unto the Bishops and Clergy of England, and to the Churches there committed to their charge, all such rights and privileges, as by law do or shall appertain to them or any of them?
  6.  All this I promise to do.

Then the Queen arising out of her Chair, supported as before, the Sword of State being carried before her, shall go to the Altar, and make her solemn Oath in the sight of all the people to observe the promises: laying her right hand upon the Holy Gospel in the great Bible (which was before carried in the procession and is now brought from the Altar by the Arch-bishop, and tendered to her as she kneels upon the steps), and saying these words:

The things which I have here before promised, I will perform and keep. So help me God.

Then the Queen shall kiss the Book and sign the Oath.

The Queen having thus taken her Oath shall return again to her Chair, and the Bible shall be delivered to the Dean of Westminster.”

Contrast Lord Welby’s acceptance of a Law that appeared in no political party’s manifesto, was rejected by 83% of consultation respondents, was rejected by Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist and Jewish leaders (who also appealed to him to defend real marriage), and which breaches the very same Christian teachings he is on payroll to uphold, with the very clear Catholic document on how to deal with laws cementing homosexual unions.

This document, “Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons”, written by Pope Benedict in his previous incarnation as Cardinal Ratzinger, distinguishes between tolerance of private arrangements, which it advocates, and the establishment of harmful institutional structures, which it opposes.

It gives guidance on what marriage is…

The Church’s teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognized as such by all the major cultures of the world. Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties and purpose. No ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman, who by mutual personal gift, proper and exclusive to themselves, tend toward the communion of their persons. In this way, they mutually perfect each other, in order to cooperate with God in the procreation and upbringing of new human lives…”

…and on how Christians should react to proposed and/or enacted legislation formalising homosexual unions:

“…Where the government’s policy is de facto tolerance and there is no explicit legal recognition of homosexual unions, it is necessary to distinguish carefully the various aspects of the problem. Moral conscience requires that, in every occasion, Christians give witness to the whole moral truth, which is contradicted both by approval of homosexual acts and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons. Therefore, discreet and prudent actions can be effective; these might involve: unmasking the way in which such tolerance might be exploited or used in the service of ideology; stating clearly the immoral nature of these unions; reminding the government of the need to contain the phenomenon within certain limits so as to safeguard public morality and, above all, to avoid exposing young people to erroneous ideas about sexuality and marriage that would deprive them of their necessary defences and contribute to the spread of the phenomenon. Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil.”

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection.”

This is not what Lord Justin is doing.

In fact on most points he does the opposite.  As we shall see in a moment, under cover of opposing “unjust discrimination against homosexual persons”, far from “unmasking the way in which such tolerance might be exploited or used in the service of ideology” the Church of England now risks “exposing young people to erroneous ideas about sexuality and marriage that would deprive them of their necessary defences and contribute to the spread of the phenomenon”.

The Archbishop’s statement finishes with a third paragraph, followed by a link ‘read more here’:

“On Monday this week Archbishop Justin launched new Church of England guidance on tackling homophobic bullying in church schools.

Read more here

Readers will not be surprised to see in this article how swiftly and pervasively bullying in general magically morphs into homophobic bullying. One paragraph is probably enough: “No school can proudly claim to be a safe, loving and protective institution while members of its community are suffering and being made unhappy through bullying. We know senior leaders in church schools are committed to ensuring they build a school culture and community where teachers and pupils feel confident and supported in challenging homophobic bullying”. See? No mention of the main reasons kids are bullied in school: appearance and disability. But then kids who look a bit odd, or who are disabled in some way, do not have taxpayer funded left wing putsches using them as culture busters.

Some Bedouins discuss homophobic bullying

The article holds out the vision of homophobic bullying discussions happening in a kind of big happy ‘Bedouin Tent’, where people of different views respectfully allow each other space. This Bedouin Tent idea is great in theory (and an advance on anything we have seen from the likes of GLAAD or HRC) but given the Church’s involving Stonewall in the programme, it is hard to see a fair hearing for kids who seek to defend reality based views on sexuality, gender and marriage.

The Archbishop himself is scarcely impartial. In a 13th May Pink News interview in which he appears to be going along with the view that traditionalists are homophobic, he is quoted as follows “As you know I have said, and got a fair amount of flak for it within parts of the Church, we have to accept, and quite rightly, that the same-sex marriage act is law, and that it’s right and proper, it’s the law of the land, and that’s great”

It might take a while to sink in. The Archbishop of Canterbury’s view on the UK’s homosexual union legislation is ‘It’s right and proper’ and ‘it’s great’.

That is quite a long way from the message his official statement is intended to convey.

 

 

 

Understanding male same-sex attraction

Wednesday, June 18th, 2014

LGBT Movement is a Civil Rights Fraud: March to Take Back Our Movement!

Monday, June 9th, 2014

Gay Marriage and Child Abuse

Friday, April 11th, 2014

Drewitt-Barlows“I am writing to inform you of the gay wedding between Barrie and Tony Drewitt-Barlow taking place this Saturday,” gushed the PR agent’s email from Essex that dropped into our GayMarriageNoThanks inbox a few days before the first gay marriage day on 29th March.

“We… actively invite protesters to turn up and be interviewed,” burbled the blurb. “The national press already confirmed are Sky TV, The Daily Mail, The Daily Mirror, The Sun. A significant number of regional publications, radio stations and TV channels are also confirmed…

“Stars of The Only Way Is Essex are among the many celebrities set to make appearances at the wedding of the gay dads,” the puff piece went on. “Elton John has been invited,” they oozed.

Clearly the event was to be an exercise in spin, hype and mirrors. The Drewitt-Barlows were legally bound together in a massively publicised Civil Partnership ceremony in 2006; they cannot therefore legally be married until more laws are changed, probably later this year. So there was to be a celebration, a party and a booze-up, but no wedding. The event was a fake.

We decided to go anyway. Having confirmed with the PR agent that no children would be in the media zone outside the event, and that we came in peace to explain our opposition to gay marriage not to protest, we set off with our GMNT posters (one shown below: ‘I want my Mum’) and arrived just before it started.

Elton JohnSurprise, surprise: Sky TV was not there. Neither was The Daily Mail. Nor The Sun. Not even Elton John.

But we had half an hour in the sunshine with the media nonetheless. We were interviewed by eight or so journalists and cameramen; most of them were local and – like most people – had never considered the adverse effects of gay marriage on children.

The problem is that all gay marriages are a counterfeit. According to the government and unlike conventional marriages, gay marriages cannot be consummated and adultery cannot be reason for divorce. So same-sex partners in a gay marriage are free to play the field whereas husbands and wives in a real marriage promise to be faithful ’til death us do part’.

By firmly bolting a counterfeit on to the hallowed institution of marriage, parliament has diluted, distorted and, in the end, dismantled an invaluable social institution. And it is the nation’s children, who need stability, commitment and faithfulness at home to best flourish, who will suffer.

Furthermore all children are necessarily created by both a mother and a father, and they have an innate right to the people that gave them birth. This child’s right should trump all adult selfish interests and rights, straight or gay. But fifteen years ago gay dads Barrie and Tony led the UK field in legally obliterating mothers from their children’s personal history (here). No mother is mentioned on their children’s birth certificates but rather Parent 1 (Barrie) and Parent 2 (Tony). It is a legally-sanctioned form of child abuse and the documents are a physiological and legal lie.

GMNTIwantmymumFurther, the gay dads deliberately have allowed no mother figure in their children’s upbringing and they have stated clearly they want to keep it that way (here).

For anyone, including the state, to refuse or absolve a mum of her child-rearing obligations without good reason also is a form of child abuse; offspring have a right to their dad and mum partly because “both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child” (UN Convention on the Rights of the Child; Article 18). Children should not be passed around like possessions or bought and sold like slaves.

What’s more the Drewitt-Barlow kids have suffered a further form of abuse. A few years ago Barrie and Tony displayed the children’s pictures on the gay-dating website Gaydar where it seems the two dads advertise for male sexual partners; apparently they prefer “firemen, married men, muscle men and rugby players” (here).

The Drewitt-Barlows are well-connected media-savvy millionaires who run surrogacy businesses in Essex and California. Tony runs seminars on same-sex parenting and promotes himself as a public speaker. Barrie claims he is an expert in same-sex parenting too. He also informs us that he is a social worker whose “aim at all times is the welfare of all children born through surrogacy” (here). He reckons himself a Christian (here).

Simply a masterclass in falsehood and hypocrisy.

(This post is also on AlansAngle.com)

I am more than my desire

Monday, March 10th, 2014

In this article on the Conjugality blog, Karee Santos explores the notion of sexual desire being pivotal in personal identity and in so doing, opens up the realm of sexual fluidity. Many do not realize that adolescents especially go through a period of same-sex attraction which for many changes to opposite-sex  attraction. Once Gay Always Gay sounds plausible but is simply untrue. Though it has been used to great effect in garnering support for gay marriage, it is one of the various myths endorsed and promoted by our PC media.

Read the article here: http://www.mercatornet.com/conjugality/view/13641#sthash.mg8dqGvv.dpuf