Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Exclusive: On the front line with Christian protesters

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Father McSphincter 21 Mar 2007, 5:40pm

    What a freak show that turned out to be then. Can’t parents be prosecuted for taking heir children out of school? Yet again, these nasty bigots have demonstrated nothing but their twisted priorities.

  2. Father McSphincter 21 Mar 2007, 5:41pm

    “Parents have a legal duty under the 1996 Education Act to make sure that children of compulsory age attend school. Permitting unauthorised absence is an offence”These vile people should have been arrested.

  3. Whilst most of this article is factual, there is a slight slant on its presentation.I was at the protest and I agree with Phil Whealy: This is not about being homophobic. Concerned parents simply do not want their children being taught about sex at such a young age. I would not want my child taught about sex (homo OR hetero) at the age of anything below 12/13! That is why parents turned up at the protest.In addition, the law, whilst it will not FORCE teachers to present homosexuality in essence, will make it open for people to sue schools or other organisations for being ANTI-gay.To give a simple example, I am ANTI people picking their nose and find it repulsive… and yet I do not HATE them – nor do I persecute them – see the difference?!The reporter was not barred from talking to us either – we simply didn’t want our words to be twisted, as any media has a habit of doing. I am sure that the majority of people are against discrimination. The people at the protest feel that the new law is discrimination against all religions (who happen to believe that sex outside of marriage is immoral). Please take us at face value – as we have the courtesy to do so likewise.Final point:I feel that homosexuality is immoral, but I also appreciate that people have the right to commit soddomy in their own homes if they wish. But don’t teach it to my kids.

  4. Rev. Göran Koch-Swahne 21 Mar 2007, 9:18pm

    “I am ANTI people picking their nose and find it repulsive… and yet I do not HATE them – nor do I persecute them – see the difference?!”Reading this, I rather prefer the comparisons to adultery and murder.;=)

  5. To Vane. Did you ever think that your children may be homosexual. How do you think they will feel being told that they are evil or bad or that their sexuality is wrong? I was a child once and I had to listen to the hurtful nasty things that bigots said, justified by their religious beliefs. I even had to suffer it from my own parents who were supposed to love me unconditionally. I knew early on that I was different and that it was me that these cruel people were talking about. You can believe that homosexuality is immoral but you have no right to make other people live by your beliefs and no right to denigrate and hurt gay and lesbian people and children who already tortured by their different sexuality are made to feel worthless. If you would just try to empathise. You think you are reasonable but you see gay people in terms of sodomy and nothing else. What about Lesbians anyway. I refuse to be childishly defined by a sexual act (which I love by the way), I am also someone who expresses love and desire, companionship and fun. I also firmly believe that love between two men or two women is completly moral and a fantastic thing. All these things make up who I am and my personality. You say this wasn’t a homophobic rally, you are kidding yourself, you say you do not want to discriminate against gay and lesbian people but these are weasle words. You are homophobic and discrimination is exactly what you are demanding. To deny needy gay men and lesbians social, educational and welfare services means they will lose out on services. To deny you your demanded right to withold those services mean you lose nothing but your right to chastise or show your dissaproval through your mean spirited and nasty refusal to provide them. Children who are homosexual and will grow up to be gay and lesbian should not have to go to a school which is homophobic, where they are open to bullying from the religious dogma and beliefs of their fellow students, teachers and policy makers. I do take you at face value. I see a hateful mob who are too lazy to empathise and who place greater importance on expressing dissaproval for homosexuality rather than treating others with respect, love and kindness, rather than doing unto others and loving their neighbour. Your protest at face value is mean spirited, cruel and humourless. People are increasingly holding a mirror up to you and you don’t like it.

  6. There was another protest (a “prayer vigil”) tonight in the same place which was just as badly attended. I was there and have posted about it on my blog, for those interested.

  7. Dear David, The possibility of my children being homosexual depends on it being a genetic condition.As there is no scientific evidence to suggest it is genetic, and as nature still suggests it is not the natural way, I will continue to believe that homosexuality is a lifestyle (or ‘deathstyle': as it has been shown that this alternative lifestyle on average, cuts 17-20 yrs of your expected life off) choice.One MP said “when we have managed to TURN all our children gay, the problem of religious bigotry affecting our laws will no longer be an issue”It doesn’t seem to have occurred to him that when this has happened, the world will end…unless you use artificial insemination – which brings me back to my earlier point: that it is not genetic or natural. I am open to new evidence, but have not seen any yet.As I will stress again, gay/lesbian people are not DENIED services currently – please do give me an example if you have any? There will still be plenty of people that would say, hire a hall out to them – so why must they be protected from so-called ‘bigots’ (i.e. anyone with a religion) that choose not to do so, saying it conflicts with their moral?I could go on, but there is no point. I will never change your perspective, I am just trying to show you the other side of the coin.

  8. well it looks like the new law is going to go through. Yippee

  9. Thanks Vane for showing me the other side of the coin. I’ve seen it often enough before. It is full of muddled logic and assumption. It usually comes from people who are not gay themselves and do not know any gay people, yet who presume to read the minds of or be experts on homosexuality. It is usually completely ignorant of human and animal sexuality. As I said you clearly can’t empathise, you have not thought about any of my points. People follow their desire and sexual desire and the desire for love is probably right up there next to hunger and thirst and avoidance of pain as major drives. Gay and Lesbian people are denied services in many different ways either subtle or directly. This legislation will I hope have an effect on the provison of central and government local authority services as well as private services. It will force schools to deal with homophobic bullying so that gay and lesbian children and those percieved to be gay and lesbian can fulfill their potential, (there are numerous studies to show that many gay and lesbian pupils are disadvantaged compared to their contempories). The schools themselves will not be able to continue with a climate of homophobia or to teach that gay and lesbian people are bad or sinful. In fact all institutions providing public or private services who tolerate or promote a homophobic climate make it more difficult for gay and lesbian people to access their services. This legislation says that in the UK it is no longer acceptable to treat gay and lesbian people badly justified by religious belief or other bigotry. The established Catholic and Anglican church have come out of this very badly they have been seen to blackmail and whine, they have demanded the right to treat gay and lesbian people badly. I think that in general they have shown themselves to be unreasonable, demanding, arcane and deserving of contempt. Hey guess what you lost.

  10. Vane – But Jesus was gay. Or at least it would seem that way today, if someone with your kind of tunnel vision were judging him. Look at the evidence – he spent his time with 12 men, all of whom were devoted to him. It’s a queer old world isn’t it?Kisses x

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all