Gay Bashing Victim Daniel Hauff Forced To Defend Himself As Chicago Trial Begins, National Organization For Marriage And Family Leader Deny Orchestrating Anti-Gay Robo Calls Made In Iowa, Christian Couple Found Guilty Of Unlawfully Refusing Same Sex Couple From Bed And Breakfast Appeals Ruling, Anglican Newspaper Defends Article Comparing Gay Rights Advocates To “Nazis”

A Chicago man spent most of Tuesday defending what he says happened to him in January 2010 on the CTA Red Line and Argyle station platform at the hands of three men: He was gay bashed, punched, kicked and called a “stupid faggot.” The Chicago Sun-Times reports that Sean Little, 23, Benjamin Eder, 25, and Kevin McAndrew, 24, all of Evanston, are standing trial on hate crime charges, accused of beating up Daniel Hauff at 3:15 am on January 10, 2010. Hauff, whose lengthy testimony and cross examination began Monday, said Tuesday he couldn’t remember all the details from a year and a half ago, especially from all the interviews he gave after the alleged attack. McAndrew’s attorney, Daniel Coyne, presented copies of articles and interview clips in which Hauff told reporters the night “was a blur.” Coyne pressed him hard, accusing Hauff of lobbying the press because he wasn’t happy the men were originally just charged with battery. “It all started because I was gay bashed and called a faggot and a stupid faggot,” Hauff retorted. “Homophobia is alive and well in Chicago — that’s why I went to the media.” Hauff, now 35 and out “all my life,” told police he was coming to the aid of another young L rider — who Hauff believed to be gay — who was being taunted by Little. So he approached Little and the others and scolded them about the hurtful power of words. Little pushed him, so he flipped Little’s hat off by its brim, Hauff testified. The tussle spilled out of the train at the Argyle station, where a witness photographed Eder punching Hauff in the face. The trial before Judge Diane G. Cannon continues Wednesday.

Two pro-marriage groups have asked the Iowa Attorney General's office to investigate election eve telephone calls, targeting Democratic State Senate Candidate Liz Mathis. The National Organization for Marriage and the Family Leader blasted the calls made Monday to voters in the 18th Senate District where Mathis and Republican Cindy Golding. The two are vying in a special election Tuesday, the outcome of which could change the balance of power inside the state Senate between the two political parties. The calls, made by an organization calling itself "Citizens for Honesty and Sound Marriage in Iowa," stated Mathis was pro same sex marriage, and asked specifically which homosexual acts she supported. The Golding campaign, when contacted by KGAN CBS 2 News Monday evening, categorically denied having anything to do with the ads. Golding supporters felt the third party ads would rebound negatively on her campaign, linking Golding to dirty tricks, last minute attack on Mathis. NOM president Brian Brown says "...a phony group claiming to support marriage launched robo calls that were so offensive they clearly were designed to turn voters away from Cindy Golding because she supports marriage between one man and one woman." Brown says his organization and Family Leader have been "out front advocates for Cindy Golding" for weeks, and condemned the calls. A spokesman for the Iowa Attorney General's office, Geoff Greenwood, said they have not seen the request for an investigation. And Deputy Secretary of State for Elections Mary Mosiman says they have not seen an investigative request for the ads either.

In the United Kingdom, Christian guest house owners have appealed against a judge's ruling that they acted unlawfully in refusing to allow a gay couple to stay in a double room. The Press Association reports that Peter and Hazelmary Bull, who run Chymorvah House in Marazion, Cornwall, challenged a ruling, made in January by Judge Andrew Rutherford at Bristol County Court, at the Court of Appeal in London. Judge Rutherford said the Bulls acted unlawfully in turning away Martyn Hall and his civil partner Steven Preddy, both from Bristol, in September 2008. He ordered the Bulls to pay the couple a total of £3,600 damages. Hall, who is in his 40s, and Preddy, in his 30s, had claimed sexual orientation discrimination under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007. Mr. Bull, 71, and Mrs Bull, 67, were in court for the start of the appeal hearing, which lawyers expect to end on Wednesday. Hall and Preddy were not in court. James Dingemans, the attorney for the Bulls, told three appeal judges that his clients had no wish to "undermine" Hall and Preddy or to disrespect them. But he argued, "The learned judge erred in failing to balance the respective rights in this case." He said the Bulls believed that "unmarried sexual behaviour was wrong" but were not prejudiced against homosexuals. Dingemans said the law should be capable of accommodating Hall and Preddy's rights under equality legislation and the Bulls' rights to beliefs about sex before marriage. "(The Bulls) have prevented hundreds of unmarried couple sharing double beds," said Mr Dingemans. "(Their) beliefs may be considered outdated, uneconomic, for those operating a private hotel but, we respectfully submit, they are entitled to manifest those beliefs," and added that the Bulls had an "absolute right" to believe that "unmarried sexual behaviour is wrong" and a "qualified right" to "manifest that belief. If human rights is to have any value at all, it must be respecting of all rights. It should not be beyond the ability of the courts to accommodate both sides."

An Anglican newspaper has defended the publication of an article that compares gay rights advocates to Nazis, saying the author has "pertinent views.” The Guardian reports that the column, by former east London councillor Alan Craig, appeared in the October 28 edition of the Church of England Newspaper, one of the oldest newspapers in the world. Although it is independent of the institution bearing the same name, it carries adverts for Church of England jobs and is read by its clergy. In his column Craig referred to a number of high-profile legal cases where Christians claim to have been penalised for their views on homosexuality. He wrote, "Having forcibly – and understandably – rectified the Versailles-type injustices and humiliations foisted on the homosexual community, the UK's victorious Gaystapo are now on a roll. Their gay-rights stormtroopers take no prisoners as they annex our wider culture, and hotel owners, registrars, magistrates, doctors, counsellors, and foster parents … find themselves crushed under the pink jackboot. Thanks especially to the green light from a permissive New Labour government, the gay Wehrmacht is on its long march through the institutions and has already occupied the Sudetenland social uplands of the Home Office, the educational establishment, the politically-correct police. Following a plethora of equalities legislation, homosexuals are now protected and privileged by sexual orientation regulations and have achieved legal equality by way of civil partnerships. But it's only 1938 and Nazi expansionist ambitions are far from sated." Craig told the Guardian he was "pretty careful" to distinguish between the leadership of gay rights groups and "ordinary gay people. I've nothing against ordinary gay people but the leadership, well I stick by my word Gaystapo. It is bullying. I oppose bullying and hatred in all its forms. There is no justification for the bullying or intimidation of gays and that has been rectified in law, but we've moved on to a new game. We're now seeing these attitudes of intolerance they accuse their opponents of." The weekly paper, which was founded in 1828 and has a circulation of around 8,000, takes pride in its reputation of being a "bastion of conservative evangelicalism.”