Can an American here at home, be held responsible for violence against people in other nations, simply by speaking out against things they consider, by the Bible, to be sins?

At the heart of this case is whether by treaty or even in the absence of a treaty, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights should be subservient to International Law. Can in matter of fact, by agreeing to any treaty, even with the United Nations, the Bill of Rights be made void. This minister in Uganda, spoke non-violently, with passion against homosexuality based on the Bible; but with equal vigor counseled against violence towards homosexuals.

The people suing him believe that since international law considers anti-homosexual speech to be hate speech, even if that speech had no direct bearing on any acts of violence against gays, simply by opposing homosexuality the speaker is an accessory to that violence and an international criminal.

We Christians have long been saying that as homosexuals gain their special rights (they already enjoy full rights under the Constitution), in direct proportion Christian speech is being made into criminal speech, in some case with large fines and prison time; just for opposing homosexuality on biblical grounds, not requiring any incitement to violence. If such suits are allowed and are won, then even to speak against homosexuality in one’s home or to have a bible that calls it an abomination, it makes such people international criminals.

Ugandan ‘gays’ say criticism of homosexuality international offense

A judge this morning took under advisement a request to dismiss a lawsuit filed on behalf of a group of “gays” in Uganda who allege that an American pastor’s opposition to homosexuality is an international criminal offense.

But he warned that at the heart of the case against Lively is the belief that the First Amendment free speech protections in the U.S. Constitution should play second fiddle to international consensus on what speech is appropriate, where criticism of homosexuality is, in fact, considered criminal.

The arguments were heard in U.S. District Court in Springfield, Mass., in the claim brought by a foreign group called Sexual Minorities of Uganda (SMUG), which alleges that Lively’s criticism of homosexuality constituted “crimes against humanity” in violation of “international law” and his speech must be punished.

Defense lawyers, however, warn that a case outcome favorable to SMUG would mean that the U.S. Constitution no longer is controlling inside the United States, the bedrock First Amendment protections provided for endowed rights simply would not exist and those standards would become “subservient to the inchoate and amorphous dictates of ‘international law.’”

Mihet told WND he argued that the lawsuit was prevented by the First Amendment, which puts the U.S. Constitution at a standing higher than international law.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus