Reader comments · Transport for London bans ‘Some People are Ex-Gay! Get Over It’ adverts after Mayor Boris Johnson intervenes · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Transport for London bans ‘Some People are Ex-Gay! Get Over It’ adverts after Mayor Boris Johnson intervenes

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. “…but not the male and female role models we need to determine who we are”.

    Based on…what?

    It’s a great message that’s being sent out here and, whatever his underlying intentions, I’m pleased Boris intervened.

    People will say that it’s dangerous to censor and will advocate freedom of speech. But we all know this will have hurt many and helped no one.

    The subsequent positive reaction to the decision to not run the adverts would not have been possible if they HAD run – reading all the grateful tweets directed at TfL is quite moving, actually!

  2. Well, they’re not ex-gay then, are they? If they’re genuinely straight, they were never gay in the first place.

    I think there’s a moral obligation to help people who think that gay-cure is the way forward – the right way is to learn how to accept who you are and not force yourself to be something you’re not. So I disagree with your attitude to it.

    1. Erm, just because it was perhaps easy for you, doesn’t mean it difficult for other people – they can be persuaded, even bullied to try and be straight. For some, it won’t feel like a choice at all. We should be trying to help them, not abandoning them.

      If you think you don’t have an obligation to help – then that says more about you than anything else.

      1. Can I just say, I’m not having a conversation with myself; these posts were detached from a now-deleted comment!

        1. Ex Christian 13 Apr 2012, 11:08am


    2. Nawal Husnoo 13 Apr 2012, 7:58am

      Gay Agenda 2:8

      A successful left-handed artist does not need “therapy” to learn to use their right hand to make mediocre paintings. That artist needs a welcoming community where creativity is nurtured and allowed to flourish. In the same way, gay people that have been bullied into trying to change their sexual orientation need a welcoming community that allows them to live freely and allowed to exercise their capacity to love. They don’t need a community that will bully them into suppressing a significant part of their personality.


  3. Fantastic to see TFL pull this.

    Are they going to take up why CBSOutdoor (their advertising agency) feel it was appropriate to run adverts promoting religious fundamentalism and homophobic hatred?

  4. Thank you Boris! Nice to see that common sense prevailed in this instance.

    1. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:19pm

      I expect he did not want his buses having things thrown at them by 90% of the population.

    2. thank you boris??! common sense? why the hell did he let these ads on in the first place? this never would have happened with Ken – on the contrary, he stopped Sandals from being allowed to advertise when they would not let same -sex couples book with them!

      1. Exactly. Now let’s wait and see what he is doing to make sure this doesn’t happen. PN should quiz him on what has happened and what is he doing from now on… Can we expect any progress? After all, he has put gay relationships on a par to bestialty… Can we expect PN to pursue these cases? Or is it too much to ask?

        1. Sister Mary Clarence 13 Apr 2012, 8:40am

          I’m sure they he will remain as vigilant as he was in this occasion.

          I hope also he will be taking the matter up with the ASA to understand how it passed their censors – clearly TfL is only one of many places that could be used to advertise this message, so I would have though the focus should be on them rather than Boris, although the ASA isn’t a Conservative politician, and with no obvious Tory connection, you won’t be able to do any Tory bashing at the ASA, so I’m guessing it will be of little interest to you.

          1. Bisexual woman in Edinburgh 14 Apr 2012, 7:07pm

            The ASA steps in once an ad is live and someone has complained about it. They weren’t consulted in this matter.

  5. Pinknews are clearly biased – even The Guardian reported this as “Boris bans ads”. And no my comments are being deleted? Whats going on?

  6. Mumbo Jumbo 12 Apr 2012, 7:15pm

    Core Trust and Anglican Mainstream refer to a study published in “Sex and Marital Therapy” in support of their campaign.

    The Guardian have examined whether this “scientific” support adds up:

    If you don’t have time to read it, the answer is, unsurprisingly, no.

    Worth bookmarking for future reference.

  7. I note that ASA banned the gay priest icecream ad ( because it was likely to cause serious offence. But ASA felt a gay cure ad was ticketty-boo. Hmmm.

    1. I don’t think the ASA will have known about this ad until today to be fair.

      1. The Guardian article says “Transport for London (TfL) subcontracts advertising for London’s buses to the advertising agency CBSO, who ran the advert past the Advertising Standards Authority, according to one of Johnson’s aides.

        The ASA said the advert “does not infringe any advertising rules in the UK”.

        1. @Victoria

          I would be surprised by that as ASA usually refuse to pre screen adverts and have specifically said they do not wish to set a precedent on assessing adverts prior to publication as it is the responsibility of the advertiser and agents to ensure that the advert is legally acceptable.

          I shall have a look at the Guardian article and other writing on it but my first thought is that there may be some misunderstanding between CBSO, TFL, and the Mayors office as to what specifically has happened here.

          1. Thanks Victoria.

            I remain surprised but the article is clear and I have also discovered that there is now this service for print ad’s – in the past there have been comments about the ASA preferring not to prescreen non-broadcast ad’s.


            It seems they do make such screening when requested nowadays – which rather begs the questions – why do the ASA find homophobia acceptable?, did the ASA advisor understand the science of “gay cure therapy” and how its both false and damging?, Does the ASA advisor have a religious affiliation? and do the ASA understand the Equality Act and their duty to support minorities such as LGBT people?

          2. The Guardian article has since been amended:
            “• The original version of this article stated that ‘the ad had been passed for display by the Committee of Advertising Practice and it complied with Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) guidelines’.

            “In fact the ASA does not pre-clear adverts and had nothing to do with the decision to pass the advert. The article has been amended to reflect this and to also remove a subsequent quote misattributed to the ASA.”

  8. Nawal Husnoo 12 Apr 2012, 7:22pm

    Phallometric test / MRI scan of their INAH-3 and I’ll believe them. Until the evidence is provided, there is no ex-gay – only deluded self-repressed self-hating homosexuals.

    1. Yes, and I’d like to submit the leading homophobes of Anglican Mainstream and Core to the same phallometric tests. And you know what, I think we’d find that homophobia = self-hatred of the repressed inner homo.

    2. I suppose the organisers of this ad campaign at Anglican Mainstream must themselves be proudly deluded self-repressed self-hating homosexuals

  9. Why has my comment about double standards at ASA been deleted?

  10. Dr Robin Guthrie 12 Apr 2012, 7:29pm

    No doubt the Terrorgraph and Daily Hate will spin this as “The censorious Gay Agenda persecuting poor likkle Chwistians.””

    1. Almost certainly.

      However, freedom of speech carries responsibilities and this advert had no evidence of responsibilities being considered.

      1. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:31pm

        Even Exodus no longer claims there is a cure. Do “Mainstream” know that?

        To claim there is a cure for a non existent illness is fraudulent. I would have thought that would breach advertising guidelines.

        1. Absolutely – the director of Exodus admits he has not seen anyone change their orientation

          1. Dr Robin Guthrie 12 Apr 2012, 11:10pm

            And Prof Spritzer who wrote the research paper they use as the basis of their claims disowned the whole damn thing.

            You could not make this up.

            Bringing out ads on ex-gay therapy the very day after its author disowns it.


    2. This doesn’t even have anything to do with freedom of speech, TfL as an organisation has the right to choose the adverts it carries (part of its free speech), nobody has banned these adverts, TfL has simply elected not to carry them.

      1. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:32pm

        Making fraudulent claims has never been protected free speech.

      2. When Boris (chair of TfL) said “London is one of the most tolerant cities in the world and intolerant of intolerance. It is clearly offensive to suggest that being gay is an illness that someone recovers from and I am not prepared to have that suggestion driven around London on our buses.”, I took that as meaning that he was banning this advert from the London transport system due to their homophobic content.

        1. As chair of the TfL corporation it is within his mandate to dictate advertising policy. He has not banned the adverts from london, merely stopped them from using the hoardings of TfL. Therefore there can be no allegation of stifling of free speech, it’s a TfL decision not a universal banning.

        2. Boris has put gay relationships on a par to bestial relationships. Isn’t that homophobic Stu?

          1. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 1:36am

            And just where did Boris compare gay relationships with animal sex?

            URL please.

          2. The comparison he made is all over the internet. Here is an example:


          3. Yes it was, Beberts – and that is one of the reasons I do not support Boris and never have or could – but it does not sdtop me recognising that his decision yesterday was a good decision. Before you start saying but he only did it because of “political reasons” or whatever, I don’t care, he stopped the adverts, made a strong comment against them – they are not happening – whether he did this because he believes its the right thing or for other reasons I do not care. They are stopped.
            Would I vote for him – no.

    3. Actually they haven’t. There is a poll on the Daily Mail asking readers ‘was Boris right to pull the ads?’ and 65% voted Yes. Better than expected. So don’t pre-judge…..

  11. Have just received this in an email from CBS Outdoor advertising

    “The campaign has been withdrawn by TfL and CBS Outdoor. Thank you for helping to bring this to our attention.

    Jason Cotterrell
    Country Director, UK”

    1. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:33pm

      Well done Stu.

  12. You’ll often find that a recent post on PN seems to disappear for a while.

    Just copy the URL at the top of the pop-up, paste it into a new tab and hit refresh.

    You’ll find you then get the latest version complete with your post, not an older cached version.

    1. That was in reply to Victoria.

    2. Spanner1960 12 Apr 2012, 10:37pm

      Just do SHIFT for the same effect.

  13. Thank God there are responsible people like Mayor Boris who has the good sense to know that the anti gay Christians are just spreading their propaganda to make trouble for people in London. His wisdom is great because now even more people will want to visit London knowing it is a safe place for all people to visit and live. It is about time all people who know what the anti gay Christians are doing stand up and stop their madness and propaganda to drive a wedge between people everywhere. Remind these anti gay Christians that the Bible is a book on how to build a bridge to include all people not cause hate and force a wedge between people using religion to do it. I am a gay Christian who knows he was created gay by God and born on earth to love one another. It is time for all gay Christians to come out and stop these anti gay mad men from destroying religion before it is too late.

    1. Spanner1960 12 Apr 2012, 10:39pm

      God had nothing to do with it.

    2. religion is going dude 21st century is taking it sorry but its true

    3. Bisexual woman in Edinburgh 14 Apr 2012, 7:13pm

      I’m an atheist myself, but good for you for coming out as a gay Christian and speaking up for love rather than bigotry. We need more people like you in the public debate.

  14. Sweet, thank you!

    People can’t be ex gay, like I’ve said. If you claim to be ex gay you’re either in denial or you’re bisexual and choose to be with only the opposite gender.

    1. To add, these people are stupid as homosexuality (and other sexual orientations) are not a choice


    1. Carrie,

      Dear – this story is about Mayor Boris stopping the adverts – saying they are unacceptable.

      Try reading this story again!

      1. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:16pm

        She’s not real, you know.

  16. Wow, some ignorant comments here. I’m not attracted to men at all but there’s no need to hate men- sexists are the people who shouldn’t be trusted.

    1. FranklyBewildered 12 Apr 2012, 9:20pm

      Talk about the pot calling the kettle after your bout of transphobia in the last few days.

      1. I don’t hate transpeople, I hate transgenderism. Men aren’t doing anything wrong by being men, but transpeople are doing something wrong by going against their real gender.

        1. You have any idea who you sound like? Hate the sin love the sinner?

          Trans people are not ‘going against their real gender’; there’s a difference between gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation and biological sex. I strongly suggest you read up on it before you make a total idiot of yourself.

          1. I’m fine with people feeling like the opposite gender or dressing more like the opposite gender, but surgery, hormones, etc should be illegal

            I don’t sound like religious people because they’re against something that’s not wrong, but I’m against something that’s extremely wrong. I also don’t follow a multi thousand year old book of evil haha.


    1. F*** off Carrie

  18. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:15pm

    Does this officially make Anglican “Mainstream” a hate group?

    1. Well David Skinner is involved and he has previously made a “call to arms” to Christians to “tackle gay people” – that suggests that there is a willingness by (him at least) to engage in Christian Terrorism and I would suggest that certainly makes them a viable hate group.

      1. If they engage in the spreading of falsehoods about gay people, then that qualifies them according to the SPLC criteria.

        1. SPLC is a US based group though.

          The UK is a different country.

          1. Well even though it i a US based definition – Anglican Mainstream do seem to fulfill SPLC’s definition of a hate group.

            They also have links to numerous groups who SPLC have named as hate groups – with either direct links to them from the AM website or to reports from those hate groups.

            I wonder which other extremist groups in the UK AM has links to and whether the police extremist groups intelligence unit is aware of them and of Skinners call to arms etc.

    2. Re:David Skinner & Anglican mainstream

      David Skinner is a well known extremist and activist, who previously has called form Christians to take up arms against Gay people.

      David Skinner is a vocal mouth piece of Anglican Mainstream (AM)

      David Skinner certianly appears testimony to the extremist nature of AM.

      1. Thanks JohnK

        Thats how scary David Skinner and his associates are, subvertive, totally unscriptural and intent on terrorist style activities (at least they have said they are)

  19. Funny, because if you type paragraphs in all captial letters shouting saying people shouldn’t hate, then you shouldn’t be hating on a group of people yourself

  20. My mind is breaking apart trying to unravel the comments by these clergypeople…

    1. McSquirter 12 Apr 2012, 9:37pm

      Because there is no application of reason before they open their mouths.

    2. Hate has no reason, it is by nature unreasonably

  21. Previous Mayoral advertising bans have resulted in policy changes:

    If precedent is anything to go by – then Anglican Mainstream and The Core Issues Trust should drop their objections to LGBT people and LGBT marriage …

    Somehow, I fear that is unlikely … nonetheless this victory is important and demonstrates that society will not accept their bigoted rhetoric and lies or as Boris said that he would be
    “intolerant of intolerance.” and that “It is clearly offensive to suggest that being gay is an illness that someone recovers from and I am not prepared to have that suggestion”

    1. Stu, I’ve put a message on the coming out study messages for you. If you get a moment, can you have a look. Thanks

      1. I shall go and have a look ;-)

      2. Hi Kris

        Have replied on the other thread with some “qualified” thought.

        If I was in your shows I would, but thats a call you have to make.

        If you need any more info etc please let me know – Are you on My PN (I think I can be a little clearer on there as I can send you messages directly)


        1. Just pending approval. Going to e-mail PN with the details and see if they will take it forward if there’s ongoing actions with Keith already.

          1. Drop me a message on here when you have approval and I will drop you a line.

  22. What a slap down ASA. They won’t be so smart in the future that’s for sure.

  23. ““married men and women unhappy with their homosexuality should be supported in developing their heterosexual potential…”

    Well they’ve realised that many married people in straight relationships are gay and that they would have been happier being accepted by eveyone as being gay and that Stonewall is right,,,people should just get over it and let us live our lives.

    I think london buses should have told them to get knotted straight away.

  24. Well; the sum of the comments from Core & AM show clearly that “Marriage” is not the issue at all. Plainly they have made denial of homosexuality as a normal and natural feature of humanity into an article of their “faith”. The denial of marriage rights is just one more issue with which to oppress us.

    These people seem to be competing with each other as to who can be the most extreme. It must by now be very difficult for any individual member of an “orthodox” church group tp express even the slightest doubt on this subject.

    As a well known gay anglican, it would be interesting to have Ben Bradshaw’s view on what extent AM do or do not represent the mainstream of anglican thinking. And equally interesting to hear what the Anglican church has to say about it.

  25. It is a clear case of censorship for a politician to ban an advert that has been approved by regulators.

    1. I can see that you are a poor loser!!!

      So Ken . . . what are you going to do about it?

      I can see that Anglican Mainstream is watching Pink News with great intensity . . .

      1. Bet Skinner is frothing at the mouth at the moment – ah diddums!

        1. Let them froth . . . Lol

      2. If you can see that I am a poor loser, then you must be thoroughly blind.
        In case you do not know, apart from trampling on freedom of speech, censoring often empowers the very words it is meant to undermine. This is what has happen in this case. The content of the banned advert is now being publicized far more than the ad on the buses could have achieved. The most interesting part is that the AM and the CT do not have to pay a dime.

        1. Does anyone care if this case cost AM or CT money in this failed fiasco? Not me.
          Is the money the most interesting part of this? No the most interesting part is the public reaction and the speedy response from Boris and TfL preventing fundamentalists having their own way and spreading lies and damage.
          The best bit is their plan failed! They lost this little battle, they will lose many more.
          Its nothing to do with freedom of speech as Damien rightly said “As chair of the TfL corporation it is within his mandate to dictate advertising policy. He has not banned the adverts from london, merely stopped them from using the hoardings of TfL. Therefore there can be no allegation of stifling of free speech, it’s a TfL decision not a universal banning.”
          But try elsewhere, and the product is now tainted, and most decent people would not touch it. If need be more barrings will be achieved.

        2. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 1:31am

          “The content of the banned advert is now being publicized far more than the ad on the buses could have achieved. ”

          Indeed it is.

          And it is meeting with deserved derision everywhere it is seen.

          More and more the holy molys are being seen for what they are.

          Bigots hiding behind religion.

        3. Ken . . . I agree it is great publicity if you want to be labelled “Nasty Christians”

          Lets have more of it . . .

          Let the world see how truly vile your lot realy are

    2. Commander Thor 13 Apr 2012, 7:53am

      Phallometric test/MRI scan or it is false advertising.

  26. Interestingly, Anglican Mainstream appear to be watching Pink News with great intensity.

    A quote from their website

    “Transport for London has said that the ‘Some People are Ex-Gay! Get Over it!’ bus advertisements booked by religious groups will not be allowed to be displayed anywhere on London transport’s network. It responded following social media uproar following revealing the advertising campaign earlier today”

    1. I hope they are watching, because I would dearly love to tell them to take their bloody fairy story and shove it up their bloody firmament.

    2. @JohnK — and from Anglican Mainstream’s reporting of the story:

      “But following a huge public outcry which labelled the Core Issues’ campaign homophobic, London Mayor Boris Johnson, who chairs Transport for London (TfL), tonight ordered the adverts to be pulled.”

      They just don’t get it. It’s not just LGBT people who find them unacceptable, it’s most people.

  27. Spanner1960 12 Apr 2012, 10:53pm

    Interesting, even the DM seem to be on our side. (Or maybe they are just reporting.)

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 10:43am

      Even if its commentators are not…..

  28. Dennis Battler 12 Apr 2012, 10:55pm

    Pulling and using the “cure” card is a non-argument. Reporting needs to make this clear.”Need to be cured” like “the world is flat’ lives in the dark minds and hearts of prejudice, ignorance and fear. Period.

  29. I describe Anglican Mainstream’s ‘NOT GAY! EX-GAY POST-GAY AND PROUD. GET OVER IT! slogan as an “attempt to close down debate about being gay and marriage ‘equality’” and the “promotion of heterosexual practices to children and young people, many of whom are known to experience ambivalence as they sort through issues of sexual identity, is misleading and dangerous”.

    While I “recognise the rights of individuals to identify as straight”, I say, “gay men and women should be supported in developing their homosexual potential, where this is the appropriate life choice for them”.

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 9:02am

      It is NOT a choice.

  30. I am a 27 years old lady,mature and beautiful. and now i am seeking a good man who can give me real love, so i got a username ceceliacm on — Agegapmingle.СòM —, a nice and free place for younger women and older men,or older women and younger men, to interact with each other.Maybe you wanna check out or tell your friends.

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 2:03am

      Use a dating site dear.

    2. Jock S. Trap 13 Apr 2012, 8:28am

      Barkin up the wrong tree love, me thinks!!!

    3. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 3:18pm

      Not unless you are hung like a Shetland pony , love.

  31. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 2:22am

    This is all VERY interesting.

    Think about it.

    Within a few hours of learning the intentions of this “proposed” Advertising campaign the internet was awash with it, initially due to Pink News running the story.

    When I read the initial story, I felt my self worth run away yet again.

    Within minutes, many of us complained to the ASA, TfL etc and Facebook / Twitter did the rest.

    Later in the afternoon, the Guardian, Huffington Post, Daily Hate and Terrorgraph ran the story.

    The complete and utter national opposition to the premise of these adverts was overwhelming in a very short space of time.

    Perhaps, the foolish originators of this nonsence should re-evaluate their faith as all I saw was discriminatory hate.

    1. Even recognize this. From their own report:

      “But following a huge public outcry which labelled the Core Issues’ campaign homophobic, London Mayor Boris Johnson, who chairs Transport for London (TfL), tonight ordered the adverts to be pulled.” [my emphasis].

      And yet they are convinced they are right and the majority of people are wrong. And they wonder why church membership is declining.

      1. – Begin Rant –

        If I had the option, I would close down every church and turn them all into a Starbucks or Poundshop.

        Then force the religious to read everything by Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Albert Einstein and Christopher Hitchens.

        After that, those who still had the religion delusion could then be sent off to an island where they could all find something new to hate and kill.

        – End of Rant. –

  32. David Wainwright 13 Apr 2012, 4:29am

    Boris Doris would make an excellent prefect.

  33. GingerlyColors 13 Apr 2012, 6:40am

    If they do find a picture of an ex-gay person to use in their ads, they should stick it on the back of the bus where it belongs!

  34. Regular bus user 13 Apr 2012, 7:51am

    New advertising campaign? “Some Christians are really nice people. The rest can get stuffed.”

  35. Jock S. Trap 13 Apr 2012, 8:28am

    Good for Boris… another reason he will be getting my vote in 3 weeks time!!

  36. I was so pleased to read that this advertising campaing has been banned and quite rightly so!

    Boris and TFL made the right choice in over riding this as it should never have been cleared to run in the first place. I think BoJo may have just increased his marginal lead over Ken in mayoral race!

  37. Unbelievably homophobic and offensive remarks about this issue being posted in the comments under the Daily Telegraph Online article reporting the ban:

    The Daily Telegraph online comments sections seems to attract the most hateful homophobic readers. It is a real eye-opener as to how much prejudice and hate is still around.

    1. Dr Robin Guthrie 13 Apr 2012, 10:37am

      The Terrorgraph is a magnet for these people.

      The illogical tripe they spout is beyond the pale and makes me sad to be a member of the same species as them

      1. More Kettle calling the pot black from the Telegraph

        Bascially, Christians are the victims and we should stomach their harrassment like good chaps!!!

        P**S OFF

    2. whataliberty 13 Apr 2012, 11:31am

      Just read some of the comments on the Telegraph, and at present there are 177. I would say doing a quick scan a 3rd are pro us the rest against us. As a paper that attracts anti gay feeling , I tihk that is still prteey good in our favour. A few years back the percentage would be higher against us and the amount much more. A long hill to climb , but we are getting there

  38. George Broadhead 13 Apr 2012, 9:37am

    I wonder whether Ken Livingstone, who gave such a warm welcome to a homophobic cleric when he was mayor, or Brian Paddick (himself a Christian) would have wanted to ban the ad.

    1. i think they would, although one being gay and other lefty would be accused of bias

    2. He banned the adverts of Sandals which were seen as homophobic – so precedent suggests Ken would have banned these adverts.

  39. I’m shocked to find out that Ben Summerskill [and Chris Bryant MP] thought this advert should not be banned. The Guardian states:

    “Both men said the advert should not be banned, however, because they believed in freedom of speech.”

    1. What part of “Adverts should be truthful” do they not understand.

    2. If they want to suffer false and malicious advertising they should move to America.

    3. Which part of the following advertising regulations do they not understand:
      “Ads should contain nothing that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care should be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or disability. Compliance is judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards of decency.
      • ads may be distasteful without necessarily breaching the rules
      • ads must not condone or encourage harmful discriminatory behaviour or treatment
      • ads must not encourage or condone violence or cruelty”
      (Direct lift from the ASA publication on standards in advertising)

      Perhaps Chris Bryant and BS would care to explain how they believe this advert did not breach this guidance (if they believe if should have been allowed to be used).

      Is Chris Bryant becoming another Ben Bradshaw?

  40. Bojo is a clown and he drives me nuts but good on him for this!!

  41. Ex Christian 13 Apr 2012, 10:19am

    I used to be a devout Christian when I was a teenager, belonging to the Christian Union at one stage, however it became clear to me that many Christians were spreading false and misleading information about gay people, and spreading ignorance rather than truth. Where their views conflicted with the evidence and experiences of gay people, they not only ignored the evidence, but did everything they could to suppress it. This still goes on. This hypocrisy and harmful mentality opened my eyes, and I would never trust nothing a religious group says again.

  42. Lynda Rose said, “while people were “free to choose” homosexuality, those with “UNWANTED” attraction to people of their own gender should “should be free to seek help if they want”.

    UNWANTED by Lynda Rose and all the other “ex-gays” and “post-gays” like her including Mike Davidson, Dermot O’Callaghan and Lisa Holland who are behind Anglican Mainstream we must assume.

  43. I just can’t believe these people, I so dislike bible quoters. If they believe this this antient fairytale good for them. But stop forcing your beliefs on the rest of us. I makes you no better than Islamic extreamists.

  44. Boris just got my vote!

  45. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 11:14am

    I find this whole thing has become horribly distorted.

    Stonewall put this “get over it” campaign up in order to push the same-sex marriage vote, but as I predicted, nobody seems to have picked up on that and it just appears like a bunch of gays chest-thumping and looking frankly bloody arrogant and full of themselves.

    Since the C4M response, it has tilted even further away into a gay vs Christian battle, which is so NOT what anybody needed. Read all the forums on the news websites and you can see how many people have got completely the wrong end of the stick due to Stonewall’s misdirected campaign. it should have been talking about marriage from the outset instead of flying off at some ridiculous tangent that missed its mark by a mile.

    1. But Stonewall inaugurated the ‘Get over it’ campaign as part of their anti-bullying initiative 5 years ago, in 2007.

      1. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 12:24pm

        Why are they reusing old material?
        This stuff is irrelevant. This isn’t about being gay per se, it’s about equal rights in marriage. All they have done is blurred the issue so now it just looks like some bunch of extremist queers having a rant for the sake of it at the church’s expense.

        That sort of campaign does nobody any good, in fact, I dare say, quite the opposite.

        1. I think it’s (sadly) no less relevant than it was 5 years ago.

          Interestingly one of my colleagues (non-gay) at work made a point of telling me she saw a bus with the slogan for the first time yesterday and how good she thought it.

          1. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 3:07pm

            That’s not the point I am making. Yes, that was a good campaign, but it is a broad-sweeping anti-homophobia one.

            They should have directly addressed the same-sex marriage argument that was currently underway to try and deflect the charges the church were making, and they did, as usual, FCK ALL!

            Stonewall have avoided the issue from the outset, and at the last minute come in with this campaign which doesn’t even mention the big issue of the day, and have instead started a firefight that totally deflects people from what is really important for LGBT people right now.

    2. Robert in S. Kensington 13 Apr 2012, 12:41pm

      I totally agree with you. StonewallUK should have been prepared long before the consultation. Instead C4M, well funded, well organised, was out there ready to strike the first blow the day the consultation began. Summerskill hasn’t even charged C4M to provide the proof in regard to its hideously vile implication that polygamous marriages might surface and other forms of relationships as a result of equal civil marriage. It’s offensive, disgusting and not even legal in any western society yet they get away with it unchallenged. Is there any wonder they give the impression they are winning, aided and abetted by the Telegraph and Mail while the Times and Guardian stand on the sidelines and let them rant and spread lies and misinformation? Why aren’t more supportive MPs speaking out. Where are Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband? Why aren’t any of the openly gay Tory MPs making noise?

      1. Stonewall are late to the table as usual.

        Their idea to run a marriage equality campaign using a slogan ‘Some people are gay, get over it’ just shows how ridiculous they are.

        1. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 3:12pm

          I said this two weeks ago: “Too Little, too late” and was chastised by many on here for saying so.

          Instead of forging ahead and making people aware that same-sex marriage affects virtually nobody except LGBT people, Stonewall have taken it upon themselves to dig out all these five year old posters from the back of their stockroom to make it look like they are actively involved, when in fact all that has happened is a huge argument about ex-gays has exploded and totally clouded the real point of the exercise.

          1. Robert in S. Kensington 13 Apr 2012, 6:11pm

            Absolutely right! If StonewallUK had been as well organised as C4M as an example, it’s quite possible we would have seen far more positive support for equal civil marriage in the media and the C4EM petition may have garnered more than C4M’s. Come to think of it, why didn’t StonewallUK come up with a pettion months ago in tandem with the government’s consultation petition? The problem with StonewallUK is that it isn’t consistent in its advertising. A poster on 1000 buses isn’t exactly going to make people think of equal civil marriage one bit. If that’s the only strategy it’s going to use, then how on earth can we expect to see more support for us? StonewallUK need to swamp the air waves, Tfl with ads and videos if we want to make our point and why equal civil marriage matters. I’ve not seen any of that. Much of the anti-gay, anti-equal marriage rhetoric is getting more media attention than expected.

  46. It is ludicrous how one side of the matter can put up all kinds of pro-gay posters, yet the opposing arguent is banned from displaying their viewpoint.
    This is yet another example of the spreading ‘affirmative action’ or ‘positive discrimination’ movements.

    1. Actually, the opposite argument would be ‘No-one is gay’, not ‘We think we can convert some gay people’.

    2. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 12:26pm

      This isn’t Pro-Gay vs Pro-Christian.
      It’s Pro-gay vs Anti-Gay.

      Therein lies one huge and fundamental difference.

    3. Robert in S. Kensington 13 Apr 2012, 12:32pm

      Well, you just don’t understand that what the opposition is trying to promote is false information since no ex-gay organisation has ever been able to change someone’s sexual orientation. One may try celibacy but it doesn’t alter the fact that one is still gay or even. Celibacy hasn’t really worked that well among many Roman Catholic clergy given its almost two millenia tradition of paedophilia (both boys and girls). The opposition is trying to imply there is a cure which is a lie (bearing false witness against gay people). Nobody has ever proved that praying away the gay works. It’s more about denial, self-loathing and preying on the vulnerabilities of insecure people while in some cases extorting money from them without any guarantee of a “cure”.

    4. Ross

      The difference is the Stonewall campaign is an honest statement – some people are gay.

      The AM advert is untruthful and supports therapy which ALL reputable professional and clinical bodies deem to be ineffective AND damaging.

      So, I take it you support lying and harming people then? If you support the AM advert – then you support harming people and lying.

      1. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 3:16pm

        Honest? Yes.
        Relevant? No.

    5. @Ross – you’re saying that it is ludicrous that anti-gay posters can’t be displayed.

      Do you really believe this ? That people should be able to display posters against gay people ?

      If you substitute black, or women, or disabled, for gay would you still hold that this was acceptable ?

      1. Maybe he would …

  47. Not a Tory fan but well done Boris!!

    1. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 12:27pm

      He says through gritted teeth. ;)

  48. **Orders “some people are gay. Get over it!!” bumper sticker online**

  49. CBS Outdoor has released a statement:

    “CBS Outdoor statement:
    “The adverts are not currently running on any London Buses and they will not do so. CBS Outdoor UK is fully compliant with all statutory restrictions and voluntary codes relating to advertising. This particular advert was passed for display by the Committee of Advertising Practice (CAP).
    Furthermore, the advert itself complies with Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) guidelines and does not breach any UK ad regulations. However, due to the sensitivity of the advert, we brought it to the attention of TfL who decided not to run it on London’s bus or transport networks.”

    1. CBS Outdoor need to explain how this advert complied with the following ASA rules:

      “Ads should contain nothing that is likely to cause serious or widespread offence. Particular care should be taken to avoid causing offence on the grounds of race, religion, sex, sexual orientation or disability. Compliance is judged on the context, medium, audience, product and prevailing standards of decency.
      • ads may be distasteful without necessarily breaching the rules
      • ads must not condone or encourage harmful discriminatory behaviour or treatment
      • ads must not encourage or condone violence or cruelty”

  50. I have now e-mailed CAP, asking why they approved the ad, considering it has the potential to distress and harm people.

    The BMA deemed conversion therapy as harmful in 2010.

  51. PLEASE TELL ME- If this advert has been APPROVED by the ASA – then what’s to stop it being published elsewhere? country Life? Daily Telegraph? Daily Mail?

    1. Spanner1960 13 Apr 2012, 3:13pm

      It has not been approved by the ASA.
      They haven’t even seen it yet. That was the media and their expert “research.”

  52. Yes, thanks to TFL for not promoting homophobia on London Transport and thanks also to Boris who I hope would have done the same even if there hadn’t been an upcoming mayoral election. I do wish these religious groups would get a life and realise that not only are they promoting homophobia with their ‘gay cure’ ideas but also promoting violence against gays and lesbians and maiking life hell for gay teenagers still at school.

  53. So Paddick is a Christian, eh?

    I always felt there was something incongruent about him.

    I hear he told the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Group at a meeting in Red Lion Square that he was an agnostic.

    One thing is for sure: he should not now get our votes.

  54. Well, so much for truth in advertising.

  55. Anglican Mainstream has prominent links on it’s website to resources from listed hate group The Family Research Council entitled “Top Ten Myths about Homosexuality” it can be found under Resources for Same-sex and Transgender Issues.

    The Family Research Council is listed among others as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Centre most of these are religiously motivated groups that have continued to pump out demonizing propaganda aimed at homosexuals and other sexual minorities Generally, the SPLC’s listings of these groups is based on their propagation of known falsehoods — claims about LGBT people that have been thoroughly discredited by scientific authorities — and repeated, groundless name-calling.

  56. Its appalling how Boris has clamped down on freedom of speech.

    And broken contractual agreements.

    The bus ads are not judging gay people.
    It is saying some people have found another way.

    Get over it !

  57. Haha, love it ! They attempt to beat tolerance and a message of ” some people are gay, it doesnt matter, deal with it” with intolerance and lies and get their arse’s whooped :’) bless, poor religous people haha what wankers :P

  58. wrote a blog about it.If you want to read it, visit

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