Patrick Craine

,

Christian B&B owners ordered to pay gay couple $4,500 in damages

Patrick Craine
Patrick Craine

GRAND FORKS, British Columbia, July 19, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Christian owners of a bed and breakfast in British Columbia have been ordered to pay around $4,500 in damages after they refused to rent a room to a homosexual couple.

Brian Thomas and Shaun Eadie had reserved a room at the Riverbend B&B in Grand Forks in June 2009, but owners Les and Susan Molnar cancelled the reservation after realizing they were homosexual.

“To allow a gay couple to share a bed in my Christian home would violate my Christian beliefs and would cause me and my wife great distress,” Lee explained in tribunal documents.

Thomas and Eadie filed a complaint with the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal, which ruled in their favour on Tuesday. Tribunal member Enid Marion ordered the Molnars to “cease and desist the discriminatory conduct,” though they closed the B&B down in September 2009 as a result of the incident.

Marion agreed with the two men that the Molnars violated section 8 of the B.C. Human Rights Code, which states that it is a discriminatory practice to “deny to a person or class of persons any accommodation” because of “sexual orientation.”

He ordered them to pay each man $1,500 for damages to “dignity, feelings and self-respect,” in addition to their travel expenses and lost wages for the tribunal proceedings.

“Having entered into the commercial sphere, the Molnars, like other business people, were required to comply with the laws of the province ... that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation,” wrote Marion.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Émile Bayard's classic illustration of Cosette in Victor Hugo's Les Miserables.
Anthony Esolen Anthony Esolen Follow Anthony

Tracts and sermons alone won’t form pro-life children. Here’s what will.

Anthony Esolen Anthony Esolen Follow Anthony
By Anthony Esolen

What is remarkable in our age is not that half of our citizens believe it is wrong to kill the child in the womb, the child whose existence, except in the rare case of rape, is owing to our own voluntary actions.  That would be like congratulating ourselves for believing that it's wrong to steal someone's car, to lie under oath to hurt an enemy, to throw our aged parents into the street, or to desecrate churches.  Where is the great moral insight?  What's remarkable instead is that half of us believe it is all right to snuff out the life of that child – because nothing must be allowed to interfere with our “right” to pursue pleasure, as we use the child-making thing as a sweating-off spa on our way to money, prestige, a five-bathroom mansion for two, a tenured chair in Women's Studies, the mayoralty of Camden, another year of nights out on the town, whatever.

How have we come to this pass?  Our imaginations are stunted or diseased, that's how.
 Let churchgoers beware.  You cannot spread pro-life icing on a cake made of flour and rat poison.  Our children meet with rat poison everywhere.  Do they watch Friends on television, that un-funny amoral “comedy” about nihilist young urbanites trading depressions in the mattress with one another?  Rat poison.  Do they watch movies like – well, the moronic Titanic, wherein a shrewish girl and a pouty boy fornicate before they are swallowed by the deep blue sea?  Rat poison.  Do their school teachers feed them such exalted lyric poetry as that of Sylvia Plath, imagining what it would be like to smash her sleeping husband's head like a rotten pumpkin?  Or the bogus Laramie Project, making a hero out of a deeply disturbed young man, killed in a meth deal?  Or Toni Morrison's maudlin obsessions with race and adultery?  Is it an endless cafeteria of ghouls, vampires, girl-murderers – Lord of the Flies, without the severe moral imagination and the talent of William Golding?  Lord of the Flies, Lady of the Flies, Cheerleaders of the Flies, Lifeguard of the Flies, Mr. Goodbar of the Flies, Fight Club of the Flies, Hunger of the Flies?  Rat poison, with that peculiar character of rat poison, that the more the critter consumes, the thirstier it grows.  Vice is the addiction that mimics the habit of virtue.  One hour a week on Sunday does not flush out the strychnine.  Theology lessons are band-aids when your arteries are porous inside.  The forming of a moral imagination is not something additional in the education of a child.  It is the education of a child. 

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Your child sees a commercial for Planned Predators.  The commercial baldly states that it doesn't matter who your “partners” are, how many you have, or what you do – because you are the only one who has any say in the matter, and nobody has the right to judge you.  This is not the morality of a cad or a tramp.  Cads and tramps have attacks of conscience.  It is the bland oh-so-self-assured anti-morality of a demon.  It is one hundred proof grain stupidity.  It is distilled evil.  Now, we want to raise children who will do more than say, “I don't agree with that.”  Wonderful enlightenment!  We want to raise children who would look upon anyone who uttered such a thing as they would look upon someone who would fish his food out of a septic tank: incomprehensible, base, inhuman, insane.  That's the negative.  Let me give the positive.  We want to raise children who will understand and cherish the virtues of love and purity.  Those virtues must not remain mere terms or notions.  We must clothe them with flesh and blood.  Consider the following scene from Victor Hugo's masterpiece, Les Miserables.  Two pure young people, Marius and Cosette, have long beheld one another from a distance.  They have fallen in love, and finally, after many months and much seeking, the youth and the maiden meet and speak.  Here is how Hugo describes what they do every evening:

Throughout the month of May . . . in that poor, wild garden, under that shrubbery each day more perfumed and dense, two human beings composed of every chastity and every innocence, overflowing with all the felicities of Heaven, closer to archangels than men, pure, honest, intoxicated, radiant, glowed for each other in the darkness.  It seemed to Cosette that Marius had a crown, and to Marius that Cosette had a halo.  They touched, they gazed at each other, they clasped hands, they pressed close together; but there was a distance they did not pass.  Not that they respected it; they were ignorant of it.  Marius felt a barrier, Cosette's purity, and Cosette had a support, Marius' loyalty.  The first kiss was also the last.  Since then, Marius had not gone beyond touching Cosette's hand, or her scarf, or her curls, with his lips.  Cosette was to him a perfume, and not a woman.  He breathed her.  She refused nothing and he asked nothing.  Cosette was happy, and Marius was satisfied.  They were living in that ravishing condition that might be called the dazzling of one soul by another.  It was that ineffable first embrace of two virginities within the ideal.

Victor Hugo was a man well acquainted with the squalor of the streets, and the wicked things that people do to themselves and one another.  His blood ran hot, not cold – hot with indignation against the wickedness, and hot with greathearted love for what is noblest in man; with what he would call the work of God in man.  Our purveyors of rat poison have not witnessed one hundredth of the miseries and the sins that he witnessed!  But they turn our children's vision to what is dark and dead, and he raises our eyes to the everlasting hills, whence cometh our help.
 We want to raise boys like Marius and girls like Cosette.  We cannot do it with tracts in church teaching and a sermon on Sunday, as needful as those things are.  They may give us the moral, but they do not nourish the imagination.  Without story, without flesh and blood, they flare in the ear but do not ring in the conscience.  Hence the need for art and song, for stories and poetry.  Jesus taught in parables.  These are not just instruments.  They are of the essence.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

,

Appeals court creates ‘right to marry by everyone and to anyone’ in Virginia: dissent

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

RICHMOND, VA – Virginia's constitutional marriage amendment lost a divided decision Monday before a three-judge panel of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, on a 2-1 margin.

Judge Henry Floyd, appointed by President George W. Bush and elevated by President Barack Obama, wrote the opinion in Bostic v. Schaefer on behalf of himself and Judge Roger L. Gregory, originally a controversial Clinton recess appointment adopted by Bush-43. Their decision upholds a ruling by U.S. District Judge Arenda L. Wright Allen, who was appointed by President Obama.

Virginia voters adopted a constitutional marriage protection amendment, defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, in 2006 with 57 percent of the vote.

Judge Floyd blamed the state's decision not to elevate gay unions to the level of traditional marriages on the majority's “inertia and apprehension.”

In his dissent, Judge Paul V. Niemeyer, a Reagan appointee, called the majority ruling “fundamentally flawed,” saying his colleagues “failed to conduct the necessary constitutional analysis.”

The other two judges erred by “concluding simply and broadly that the fundamental ‘right to marry’ – by everyone and to anyone – may not be infringed,” because the ruling fails to address “why this broad right to marry, as the majority defines it, does not also encompass the ‘right’ of a father to marry his daughter or the ‘right’ of any person to marry multiple partners.”

“If the majority were to recognize and address the distinction between the two relationships – the traditional one and the new one – as it must, it would simply be unable to reach the conclusion that it has reached,” he wrote.

Peter Sprigg, the Family Research Council's senior fellow for policy studies, agreed with Niemeyer. “The court ruling defines the 'right to marry' so broadly that it raises the question whether the logic would allow society to maintain any coherent definition of marriage," he said in a press release.

In a statement, Virginia Delegate Bob Marshall, who co-authored the amendment, asked, “Will three lesbian women in Massachusetts, a 'throuple,' move to Virginia to have their aberrant 'marriage' relationship sanctioned by Judges Gregory and Floyd?”

Marriage redefinition proponents have held that excluding homosexuals is a new legal stratagem, and concerns about the well-being of children serve only to hide lawmakers' “animus” against homosexuals.

But Niemeyer quoted state marriage laws, in some cases stretching back more than 100 years, which affirm marriage as the “mutual agreement of a man and a woman to marry each other” for the purpose of “establishing a family, the continuance of the race, the propagation of children, and the general good of society.”

“Virginia’s laws have always rightly reflected the true and complementary nature of marriage,” Victoria Cobb, president of The Family Foundation of Virginia, said in a statement. “It’s unfortunate that the court rejected the right of Virginians to define marriage consistent with their concern with what’s best for children and society as a whole” and “chosen to disenfranchise the 1.3 million Virginians who legally voted to amend our constitution.”

The case was left to Norfolk clerk George Schaefer III, after newly-elected state Attorney General Mark Herring refused to defend the law in court. Virginia's Democratic governor, Terry McAuliffe, who defeated former Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli in the 2013 governor's race, celebrated the legal imbalance.

“I want to thank Attorney General Mark Herring for his leadership in this case, and all of the men and women who fought for years to make this day a reality,” the governor said in a statement. “Progress does not always come as quickly as we hope it will, but today is yet another example of how justice, equality, and the people who fight for those values will always persevere in the end.”

Despite a string of rulings invalidating voter-backed amendments across the nation, traditional marriage supporters refuse to concede.

Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Counsel Byron Babione, who is representing Prince William County Clerk of Court Michéle B. McQuigg, said in a press release, “Ultimately, the question whether the people are free to affirm marriage as a man-woman union will be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. If the high court remains consistent with its acknowledgment in its Windsor decision of the right of states to define marriage, the states will ultimately be free to preserve man-woman marriage, should they choose to do so.”

Marshall hoped the justices will not impose their social views on the nation at large. “If judicial elites impose a radical and immoral marriage regime on American citizens in defiance of the 'Laws of Nature and Nature's God,' the result would be to tear the social fabric in ways that can scarcely be imagined,” he said.

Sprigg disagreed that even a Supreme Court's ruling would settle the issue. “While the Left continues to use the federal courts as the means to fulfill their radical social agenda, the courts will not have the final say,” he said. “They cannot change natural law and the fact that society needs children, and children need a mom and a dad.”


Advertisement
Featured Image
13-year-old Zoe Griffin Courtesy of Stand True
Bryan Kemper Follow Bryan

A 13-year-old on the day her mom told her she had an abortion

Bryan Kemper Follow Bryan
By Bryan Kemper

Stand True recently published a story about a mom telling her children about her past abortion.  Today we are sharing that story from one of her daughters about the day she found out. Zoe had been working on this story to e-mail to her mom when her mother walked in and told her to clean her room. That is when Zoe clicked send.

———–

We had just dropped my brother and sisters off at Faith Formation. It was a Wednesday evening: January 8, 2014. I would be 13 in just over two weeks.

My mom said, “Zoe, I need to talk to you. Let’s go in the meeting room.” I thought we were going to talk about puberty. I got nervous and fidgety. “Mama,” I kept saying, “I’m not ready for this talk. I don’t want to know about it.” We got to the conference room and Mama sat down. I sat a few chairs away. “Sit here please, Zoe,” she said. “I don’t want to,” I whined. “Zoe,” she said firmly, “sit next to me.” I reluctantly sat down next to her, dreading what she had to say. What she said next would change my life forever. “Zoe,” she said, “in December of 1998, I had an abortion.” I felt like I had been slapped in the face. My whole world was rocked. I wanted to puke, I wanted to cry, I wanted to run away and hide. This amazing person, someone I have looked up to my whole life, my pro-life inspiration, had had an abortion.

I stared at the glassy table where we were sitting. Mama was crying now. She told me how her boyfriend at the time had had a pregnant girlfriend before and how he said that he would “take care of it”. She told me how she had woken up after the abortion and thought how lucky she was to have such a great boyfriend. She told me she had gone crazy in the days after the abortion. She explained everything.

“Do you have any questions?” she asked. “No,” I said. “Do you forgive me?” she asked. “Yes,” I said. “Your big brother’s name is David,” she said. Big brother. For years I had been saying, “I wish I had an older brother or sister!” Now I knew that I had one. We sat in silence for a while. Mama called Fr. Rossi, our parish priest, and he joined us in our little meeting. This was when I learned that a lot of people had heard her testimony before. He told us that now would be a great time to visit Jesus in Adoration. I was so thankful it was Wednesday! We went into Adoration and prayed. We prayed and prayed and prayed. I’m not sure what Mama prayed about, but I prayed for understanding about what had just happened. I prayed a Rosary for David, that he was in Heaven praising God. That night, when everyone was at home, my mom was on her computer. She had just let me read her testimony, which had been published online. Jackson, my 7-year-old brother, saw the picture of Mama holding a sign that said, “I regret my abortion”. “Wait,” he said, “you had an abortion?” Mama’s face paled. “Yes,” she said. Then, returning to his homework, he asked, “How do you spell ‘Guido’?” Mama went along with it. “G-U-I-D-O”, she said. “I’m done with my homework!” Jack said, and he rushed upstairs. Later that night, Lily and Bella, my two sisters, were downstairs. Jack came downstairs and said, “Hey! Did you guys know Mama had an abortion?” “No she didn’t,” Lily said, “she just got her tubes tied!” She turned to Mama. “Wait,” she said slowly, “did you have an abortion?” Mama then started to have the same conversation with them she had had with me earlier. Jack started crying and ran upstairs. Lily and Bella were tearing up, too, but they listened to Mama’s story. I followed Jackson upstairs. I found him in bed, his head buried in his pillows, crying. I sat next to him, held him, tried to comfort him. Mama came in and took over for me.

The five of us were all in one place, everyone crying except for me. We prayed a little together, and then we went to bed. I was shaken for the next few days. I will never forget that experience, but I am kind of glad it happened. I have taken the pro-life movement even more seriously than before.

I want to be able to say I avenged my big brother David by abolishing abortion, and I am confident that I am part of the generation that will do that.

This is what I was doing when you told me to clean my room.

Zoe

———-

We know how much abortion hurts men and women but we don’t often think of the sibling effect of abortion. I remember many years ago, a young woman approached my booth at a music festival. She explained how she had bought a pro-life t-shirt from me the year before and wore it home from the festival. When her mom saw the shirt, she decided to tell her daughter that she had had an abortion many years ago. They were able to seek counseling and the mother found healing as did her daughter. She thanked me for the work we were doing and bought another t-shirt.

There are some amazing resources for anyone who is hurting from abortion.

Rachel’s Vineyard Ministries

Silent No More Awareness Campaign

Reprinted with permission from StandTrue.com.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook