Steve Jalsevac

, , ,

NewsBytes, January 1 - DADT, Homosexuality, Elton John

Steve Jalsevac
Steve Jalsevac

* Disclaimer: The linked items below or the websites at which they are located do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.com. They are presented only for your information.

Compiled by Steve Jalsevac

REPEAL OF DON"T ASK, DON’T TELL

FRC Criticizes Pentagon’s CRWG Report on Open Homosexuality in the Military.
No Level of Risk Should be Acceptable Merely to Advance a Liberal Social Agenda says FRC

Most Catholics in US Congress voted to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell” - Catholic Culture
Of the 160 Catholics serving in the current US Congress (135 in the House of Representatives, 25 in the Senate), 117 voted to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy that had barred homosexuals from serving openly in the military.

Democrats Rush to Make Money Off DADT Repeal
- CNS
Wasting no time to raise funds, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee is selling a photo of President Obama signing the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Supporters of the legislation are urged to “celebrate the repeal” by purchasing an unframed print for $25 or a “beautiful framed version” for $50.

Expert: Open homosexuality in military being ‘rushed’
- WorldNetDaily
Center for Military Readiness President Elaine Donnelly said “gay” advocates are “rushing” Defense Secretary Robert Gates to implement the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy before he is able to certify properly that permitting open homosexuality will not harm the military. “It’s like Nancy Pelosi saying we have to pass this health care bill so people can find out what’s in it,” Donnelly told WND.

Ban homosexuals from National Guard - Washington Times
States have power to block Obama’s social policy. President Obama supported repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” ending 232 years of American military policy, going back to George Washington, that prohibited persons who engage in homosexual behavior from serving in our armed services.


CATHOLIC CHURCH AND DADT


What the Military Must Learn from the Church by Tim Drake
- National Catholic Register
In Michael Rose’s 2002 book Goodbye! Good Men: How Catholic Seminaries Turned Away Two Generations of Vocations From the Priesthood, he explores the Church’s own period of openly accepting homosexual seminary candidates. Many seminaries celebrated the intimacies of homosexual relations, which are directly opposed to true “brotherhood.” It is this culture that gave rise to the ordination of homosexuals who later went on to become serial abusers.

The connection between homosexuality and abuse was clearly demonstrated in 2004’s The Nature and Scope of the Problem of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States, otherwise known as the John Jay Report. Fitzgibbons told Catholic News Agency that “every priest whom I treated who was involved with children sexually had previously been involved in adult homosexual relationships.”

What will be the result once the military has been compromised by disordered love? What will happen when an 18-year-old recruit finds himself in an unequal power differential with a superior officer who wants something more than push-ups? Disordered love leads to disordered loyalties.

Officer won’t sign order for troop indoctrination
- WorldNetDaily
Asks to be relieved of command over repeal of ‘gay’ ban in military. Currently the commander of a battalion-sized unit in the Army National Guard, the officer also has threatened to resign his commission rather than undergo “behavior modification” training intended to counter his religious convictions about homosexuality.

Military watchdog: Catholic Church silent at wrong time
- onenewsnow.com
An advocate for America’s fighting men and women says she’s disappointed the Catholic Church didn’t take a stronger stance against the recent lame-duck Congress’s reckless decision to repeal the law that banned homosexuals from military service. Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, says it appeared that Wuerl was not prepared for the question.

“...And he should have been [prepared], because the archbishop who is in charge of military services based in Washington, DC, did issue a statement back in June recommending that the law not be repealed,” Donnelly points out.

Where is the USCCB on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”?
- Examiner
Fueling the belief that the pro-homosexual Lavender Mafia is alive and well within the hierarchy of the Catholic Church in America, the USCCB (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) has been conspicuously silent on condemning the Obama Administration and the overwhelmingly Democrat support in Congresss for the repeal of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” regulation that prohibited openly homosexual individuals from serving in the Armed Forces.

One of the few, if not only, Catholic prelate to speak out against the repeal has been the leader of the Archdiocese of the Military Services, Archbishop Timothy Broglio. The same individual who refuses to withhold Holy Communion from the notoriously pro-homosexual and pro-abortion lawmaker Nancy Pelosi, the Archbishop of Washington, DC, Donald Cardinal Wuerl, recently stated that “there isn’t a specific Catholic Church position” on the issue of homosexuals serving in the military.

However, in 1992, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (then headed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, the current Pope Benedict XVI) taught; “there are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption


MISCELLANEOUS

Elton John: named as father on birth certificate of baby Zachary - Telegraph
His civil partner David Furnish has been named as the “mother” on computer documentation for Zachary Jackson Levon Furnish-John. The child was born on Christmas Day to a surrogate mother in California at a cost of more than £100,000.

American Conservative Union Board Approves Homosexual Republican Group in CPAC
- CNS
The board of the American Conservative Union has approved a homosexual Republican group for a planning role in the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), a major annual event in Washington, D.C., that draws conservatives from across the country.
Although the ACU is officially saying the matter is still open, an informed source told CNSNews.com that the 31-member board has in fact voted to approve GOProud as a participating organization in the 2011 CPAC, and GOProud itself is saying that it has been approved as a participating organization.

Barney Frank: ‘Let Me Own Up’ to the ‘Radical Homosexual Agenda’
- CNS

Lesbian Chai Feldblum Confirmed as Equal Employment Opportunity Commissioner
...the homosexual activist who rightly acknowledges that “rights” based on homosexuality and the religious freedom to live out one’s opposition to homosexuality cannot peacefully coexist in the law – has been confirmed as a Commissioner of the EEOC. A lesbian and top homosexual legal strategist, Feldblum calls the battle between religious freedom and homosexuality-based “rights” a “zero-sum game” – in which homosexuals usually should win and Christians should lose.

Gay lobbyists demand meeting with Sydney Cardinal George Pell
Gay rights advocates want to meet with the head of the Catholic church in Australia to discuss why parishioners are being told to oppose same-sex marriage. They have written to the Archbishop, concerned about what they call a “destructive” church campaign against same-sex marriage

Apple Says “No” to Manhattan Declaration App 2.0 - manhattandeclaration.org
We received notice from Apple last evening regarding their rejection of our resubmission of the Manhattan Declaration iPhone/iPad app to the Apple App Store. This is an appalling response from Apple.  Nearly 500,000 Christians have signed the Manhattan Declaration including representatives from many major Protestant denominations, leading Catholic Bishops and leaders of the Orthodox Church. 

Apple is telling us that the apps’ content is considered “likely to expose a group to harm” and “to be objectionable and potentially harmful to others.” Inasmuch as the Manhattan Declaration simply reaffirms the moral teachings of our Christian faith on the sanctity of human life, marriage and sexual morality, and religious freedom and the rights of conscience, Apple’s statement amounts to the charge that our faith is “potentially harmful to others.”

Gender games - Mercator
When a woman claims to be a man, should the university and the press play along?

Canadian Broadcasting Corporation: Publicly funded censorship By Rory Leishman
Day in and day out, our national broadcaster serves up an unrelenting drumbeat of propaganda for homosexual acts, promiscuity, abortion and a range of other perversions. Of late, the corporation has even started slanting its news broadcasts in favour of legalized prostitution.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
LifeSiteNews staff

,

Quebec groups launch court challenge to euthanasia bill

LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

As announced when the Quebec legislature adopted Bill 52, An Act respecting end-of-life care, the citizen movement Living with Dignity and the Physicians’ Alliance against Euthanasia, representing together over 650 physicians and 17,000 citizens, filed a lawsuit before the Superior Court of Quebec in the District of Montreal on Thursday.

The lawsuit requests that the Court declare invalid all the provisions of the Act that deal with “medical aid in dying”, a term the groups say is a euphemism for euthanasia. This Act not only allows certain patients to demand that a physician provoke their death, but also grants physicians the right to cause the death of these patients by the administration of a lethal substance.

The two organizations are challenging the constitutionality of those provisions in the Act which are aimed at decriminalizing euthanasia under the euphemism “medical aid in dying”. Euthanasia constitutes a culpable homicide under Canada’s Criminal Code, and the organizations maintain that it is at the core of the exclusive federal legislative power in relation to criminal law and Quebec therefore does not have the power to adopt these provisions.

The organizations also say the impugned provisions unjustifiably infringe the rights to life and to security of patients guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. They further infringe the right to the safeguard of the dignity of the person, which is also protected by the Quebec Charter.

In view of the gravity of the situation and the urgent need to protect all vulnerable persons in Quebec, they are requesting an accelerated management of the case in order to obtain a judgment before the Act is expected to come into force on December 10, 2015.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
LifeSiteNews staff

,

Colorado baker appeals gvmt ‘re-education’ order

LifeSiteNews staff
By LifeSiteNews staff

A Colorado cake artist who declined to use his creative talents to promote and endorse a same-sex ceremony appealed a May 30 order from the Colorado Civil Rights Commission to the Colorado Court of Appeals Wednesday.

The commission’s order requires cake artist Jack Phillips and his staff at Masterpiece Cakeshop to create cakes for same-sex celebrations, forces him to re-educate his staff that Colorado’s Anti-Discrimination Act means that artists must endorse all views, compels him to implement new policies to comply with the commission’s order, and requires him to file quarterly “compliance” reports for two years. The reports must include the number of patrons declined a wedding cake or any other product and state the reason for doing so to ensure he has fully eliminated his religious beliefs from his business.

“Americans should not be forced by the government – or by another citizen – to endorse or promote ideas with which they disagree,” said the cake artist’s lead counsel Nicolle Martin, an attorney allied with Alliance Defending Freedom. “This is not about the people who asked for a cake; it’s about the message the cake communicates. Just as Jack doesn’t create baked works of art for other events with which he disagrees, he doesn’t create cake art for same-sex ceremonies regardless of who walks in the door to place the order.”

“In America, we don’t force artists to create expression that is contrary to their convictions,” added Alliance Defending Freedom Senior Legal Counsel Jeremy Tedesco. “A paint artist who identifies as homosexual shouldn’t be intimidated into creating a painting that celebrates one-man, one-woman marriage. A pro-life photographer shouldn’t be forced to work a pro-abortion rally. And Christian cake artists shouldn’t be punished for declining to participate in a same-sex ceremony or promote its message.”

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

In July 2012, Charlie Craig and David Mullins asked Jack Phillips, owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop, to make a wedding cake to celebrate their same-sex ceremony. In an exchange lasting about 30 seconds, Phillips politely declined, explaining that he would gladly make them any other type of baked item they wanted but that he could not make a cake promoting a same-sex ceremony because of his faith. Craig and Mullins, now represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, immediately left the shop and later filed a complaint with the Colorado Civil Rights Division. The case now goes to the Colorado Court of Appeals as Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Craig.

“Jack, and other cake artists like him – such as those seen on TV shows like ‘Ace of Cakes’ and ‘Cake Boss’ – prepare unique creations that are inherently expressive,” Tedesco explained. “Jack invests many hours in the wedding cake creative process, which includes meeting the clients, designing and sketching the cake, and then baking, sculpting, and decorating it. The ACLU calls Jack a mere ‘retail service provider,’ but, in fact, he is an artist who uses his talents and abilities to create expression that the First Amendment fully protects."

Celebrity cake artists have written publicly about their art and the significant expressive work that goes into the artistic design process for wedding cakes.


Advertisement
Featured Image
Tony Gosgnach / LifeSiteNews.com
Tony Gosgnach

,

Prisoner of conscience Mary Wagner appeals her conviction

Tony Gosgnach
By Tony Gosgnach

TORONTO -- As promised, Mary Wagner has, through her counsel Dr. Charles Lugosi, filed a formal notice of appeal on numerous points regarding her recent, almost two-year-long court case that ended on June 12.

Justice Fergus O’Donnell of the Ontario Court of Justice rejected every application made by the defence – including for access to abortion center records, public funding, standing for a constitutional challenge and for expert witnesses to be heard – before he found Wagner guilty and sentenced her to five months in jail on a charge of mischief and four months on four counts of failing to comply with probation orders.

He further levied two years of probation, with terms that she stay at least 100 metres away from any abortion site. However, because Wagner had spent a greater time in jail than the sentence, she was freed immediately. She had been arrested at the “Women’s Care Clinic” abortion site on Lawrence Avenue West in Toronto on August 15, 2012 after attempting to speak to abortion-bound women there. She then spent the duration of the trial in prison for refusing to sign bail conditions requiring her to stay away from abortion sites.

Wagner is using the matter as a test case to challenge the current definition of a human being in Canadian law – that is, that a human being is legally recognized as such only after he or she has fully emerged from the birth canal in a breathing state.

Wagner’s notice states the appeal is regarding:

  • Her conviction and sentence on a single count of mischief (interference with property),
  • Her conviction and sentence on four counts of breach of probation,
  • The order denying public funding,
  • The order denying the disclosure of third-party records,
  • The order denying the admission of evidence from experts on the applicant’s constitutional challenge concerning the constitutional validity of Section 223 of the Criminal Code,
  • The order denying the admission of evidence from experts concerning the construction of Section 37 of the Criminal Code,
  • The probation order denying Wagner her constitutional rights to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion on all public sidewalks and public areas within 100 metres of places where abortions are committed,
  • And each conviction and sentence and all orders and rulings made by O’Donnell.

In the notice of appeal, Lugosi cites numerous points on which O’Donnell erred:

  • He denied Wagner her constitutional right to make full answer and defence.
  • He denied Wagner her right to rely on Section 37 of the Criminal Code, which permits “everyone” to come to the third-party defence and rescue of any human being (in this case, the preborn) facing imminent assault.
  • He decided the factual basis of Wagner’s constitutional arguments was a waste of the court’s time and that no purpose would have been served by having an evidentiary hearing on her Charter application because, in the current state of Canadian law, it had no possibility of success.
  • He misapplied case law and prejudged the case, “giving rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias and impeding the legal evolution of the law to adapt to new circumstances, knowledge and changed societal values and morals.”
  • He accepted the Crown’s submission that it is beyond the jurisdiction of the courts to question the jurisdiction of Parliament legally to define “human being” in any manner Parliament sees fit.
  • He ruled Section 223 of the Criminal Code is not beyond the powers of Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982.
  • He ruled Section 223 of the Criminal Code does not violate the Preamble to, as well as Sections 7, 11(d), 15 and 26, of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
  • He denied Wagner standing to raise a constitutional challenge to the validity of Section 223 of the Criminal Code.
  • He ruled that Section 223 of the Criminal Code applied generally throughout the entire Criminal Code and used it to deny unborn human beings the benefit of equal protection as born human beings under Section 37 of the Criminal Code.
  • He denied the production and disclosure of third-party records in the possession of the “Women’s Care Clinic” abortion site, although the records were required to prove Wagner was justified in using reasonable force in the form of oral and written words to try to persuade pregnant mothers from killing their unborn children by abortion.
  • He denied Wagner the defence of Section 37 of the Criminal Code by ruling unborn children did not come within the scope of human beings eligible to be protected by a third party.
  • He ruled Wagner did not come within the scope of Section 37 because she was found to be non-violent (in that she did not use physical force).
  • He ruled the unborn children Wagner was trying to rescue were not under her protection.
  • He denied Wagner the common-law defences of necessity and the rescue of third parties in need of protection.
  • He denied Wagner public funding to make full answer and defence for a constitutional test case of great public importance and national significance.
  • He imposed an unconstitutional sentence upon Wagner by, in effect, imposing an injunction as a condition of probation, contrary to her constitutional rights of free speech, freedom of expression, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Among the orders Lugosi is seeking are:

  • That an appeal be allowed against conviction on all counts and that a verdict of acquittal be entered on all counts,
  • That Section 223 of the Criminal Code be found unconstitutional  and contrary to Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, as well as the unwritten constitution of Canada,
  • That the sentence be declared unconstitutional and contrary to Section 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, and the unwritten constitution of Canada or that a new trial be conducted, with Wagner permitted to make full answer and defence, be given standing to make a constitutional attack on Section 223 of the Criminal Code, with the admission of expert witnesses,
  • That the Women’s Care Clinic abortion site be made to produce third-party records pertaining to patients seen on August 15, 2012 (when Wagner entered the site),
  • And that there be public funding for two defence counsels at any retrial and for any appeal related to the case.

No date has yet been established for a decision on the appeal or hearings.

A defence fund for Wagner’s case is still raising money. Details on how to contribute to it can be found here.


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook