Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Transport for London ‘welcomes’ court ruling in favour of anti-gay bus advert ban

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Colin (Queenstown/London) 27 Jan, 7:23pm

    Good news at last. Hopefully puts core trust in it’s place. London and the UK are great places to live and visit. We want an inclusive society not one divided by core trust and their religious imported American mad dogma. (Many good things in USA just not religion)

    1. CH Brighton 27 Jan, 9:15pm

      You wouldn’t think they’d been put in their place from the Core Issues/ Anglican Mainstream/ Christian Concern websites. As usual, they’re seeking to undermine us and our battle for human rights and equality.

  2. Religion is the ‘lifestyle choice'; not sexuality! Wonderful to read the voices of reason descending on the madmen religious bigots.

    1. I’d argue that religion isn’t a choice either.
      It’s the product of brainwashing, peer pressure and group-think, and in some cases comorbid with schizophrenia.
      Religious followers need help. They need treatment.

      1. While it is difficult to change beliefs that are established at an early age, it is not impossible – in the case of religion, witness how many people shift from one to another and back again. Contrast this with skin colour, left-handedness and sexual orientation, which are innate characteristics. We all have beliefs that ‘are the product of brainwashing, peer pressure and group-think’ to a large extent, but what matters is what we believe and how we choose to act on those beliefs, not how we acquired them.

      2. Religion is totally a choice. I was cured, brethern! Bless the science! ;)

  3. PN, this is really confusing when you also have this story on the front page:
    http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/01/27/ex-gay-christian-charity-wins-bus-ad-ban-court-of-appeal-ruling/
    What is the accurate story?

    1. Midnighter 27 Jan, 8:17pm

      As far as I understand it that article is concentrating on a lesser issue, namely whether the Mayor followed correct procedure in telling TfL not to run the ads. All that has happened is they are allowed their appeal so that question gets a second look.

      Whatever Boris has to say about it, TfL clearly won’t run the ads given the legal breaches noted, so it seems a technicality really : it may well turn out that – even if the appeal decides he acted improperly – the Mayor can legitimately influence such things if he follows correct process.

      So without being overly cynical, I’m not sure why that article ran in that manner either.

  4. Midnighter 27 Jan, 8:12pm

    So if Core Issues Trust “broke numerous parts of the UK’s Equality Act 2010 and the European Convention on Human Rights” … is their only “punishment” to be told they can’t put up such material?

    Yet again – where is the condemnation from “moderate” Christianity? Their silence speaks volumes.

    1. Midnighter 27 Jan, 8:28pm

      I went hunting for responses from the Anglican church and interestingly found this from a statement from the College of Bishops in response to the Pilling report:

      “We are united in welcoming and affirming the presence and ministry within the Church of gay and lesbian people, both lay and ordained. We are united in acknowledging the need for the Church to repent for the homophobic attitudes it has sometimes failed to rebuke and affirming the need to stand firmly against homophobia wherever and whenever it is to be found.”
      (from http://www.trueanglican.org/)

      This is dated today. It would be awfully nice to ask them their views of CIT’s mission in the light of the above statement.

      1. Robert in S. Kensington 27 Jan, 8:36pm

        What I’m looking for from the Pilling report is not just to repent for homophobic attitudes and to condemn homophobia wherever and whenever but an official apology to all gay people who suffered from the criminalisation of homosexuality propped up and supported by the CofE. Another step forward would be if it allowed individual clergy permission to marry gay couples, just like the Anglicans in Canada and the U.S. do.

  5. Good we don’t want London to descend into Putin’s Russia now do we?

  6. Goody. I do hope they lost their shirts on this futile hate campaign.

  7. de Villiers 27 Jan, 11:41pm

    Lord Justice Briggs:

    103. I wish only to make some brief observations of my own about the judge’s finding that the Stonewall advertisement also failed to comply with aspects of the Policy, because it was likely to cause widespread or serious offence or related to matters of public controversy. As my Lord has said, she was able and entitled to make that finding.

    1. de Villiers 27 Jan, 11:42pm

      In my judgment she was also right to do so. There are many people, of many different faiths and none, who have been brought up and taught to believe that all homosexual conduct is wrong. Many have, after long and careful thought, arrived at a different view. Some have been encouraged along the way by bold expressions of the type found in the Stonewall advertisement. But many others continue sincerely to hold that belief, and some regard a departure from it as inconsistent with the maintenance of their faith. Some would rather give up their jobs, or discontinue their businesses, than act in a way which they believe condones such conduct, whether by conducting civil partnership or gay marriage ceremonies, by admitting gay couples to bed and breakfast accommodation, or by providing adoption training to gay couples. Sincere differences of view about this issue are tearing apart some religious communities, both here and abroad.

      1. de Villiers 27 Jan, 11:42pm

        104. In my judgment she was also right to do so. There are many people, of many different faiths and none, who have been brought up and taught to believe that all homosexual conduct is wrong. Many have, after long and careful thought, arrived at a different view. Some have been encouraged along the way by bold expressions of the type found in the Stonewall advertisement. But many others continue sincerely to hold that belief, and some regard a departure from it as inconsistent with the maintenance of their faith. Some would rather give up their jobs, or discontinue their businesses, than act in a way which they believe condones such conduct, whether by conducting civil partnership or gay marriage ceremonies, by admitting gay couples to bed and breakfast accommodation, or by providing adoption training to gay couples. Sincere differences of view about this issue are tearing apart some religious communities, both here and abroad.

        1. de Villiers 27 Jan, 11:43pm

          105. Like my Lord, I consider that the Stonewall advertisement was probably intended to promote tolerance of gay people and to discourage homophobic bullying, and that this is plainly a lawful aim. But the advice to ‘get over it’ is a confrontational message which is likely to come across to many of those to whom I have just referred as at least disrespectful of their sincerely held beliefs, and to some as suggesting that there is no place for the toleration of their beliefs in modern society. Displayed on the side of London buses it is therefore likely to cause widespread offence to many, even if it may have promoted tolerance and understanding in others.

          1. de Villiers 27 Jan, 11:43pm

            106. But like the judge and my Lord, I do not regard that conclusion about the Stonewall advertisement as undermining the proportionality of a refusal to permit the Trust’s advertisement, if based upon a lawful process of decision making. It is for that purpose unnecessary even to make a comparison between the degree to which each advertisement may cause offence. Nor is it necessary or appropriate on this appeal to decide whether, as the Trust now claims in separate proceedings currently stayed, the recent decision to accept it again on London buses was itself unlawful. Even if it was, two wrongs do not make a right.

  8. Jacob Dugan-Brause 28 Jan, 7:08am

    Lord Justice Briggs: “…two wrongs do not make a right.”

    Sigh, the consequences to the free expression of ideas and sentiment are profound here. Just as British society clamours for CCTV surveillance against its fears, this ruling solidifies the restraint of public opinion.

    I suppose it’s my American 1st Amendment indoctrination kicking in. I’m British now and civil conduct is seemingly more important than silly notions of an American “free marketplace of ideas.”

    I look at my experience on two sides of the Atlantic and am sometimes surprised by the difference in political culture. Perhaps I decided these questions when my (soon to be recognised) husband and I moved here seven years ago.

    I should simply ‘Get over it’.

    1. I’m English but I’m certainly not clamouring for CCTV surveillance.

      1. Jacob Dugan-Brause 28 Jan, 3:57pm

        Well, that’s a start. Thank you.

    2. I would agree were it not for the fact I do not see this as an issue of free speech but one of poor and misleading advertising. In an attempt to parody the stonewall campaign Core Issues Trust were blatantly trying to push the idea that it is possible to become “ex gay”

      This isn’t only nonsense, the therapy around this has done a great deal of hard to many. Indeed http://www.beyondexgay.com/ shows how harmful it is to even those who willingly chose themselves to undergo therapy.

      Also lets not forget that Core Issues Trust don’t only misrepresent the facts, but don’t represent Christians or Christian thinking on the matter.

      http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/13/christian-therapists-stop-conversion-therapy-turn-gay-patients-straight

      And finally, no, I too do not clamour for CCTV surveillance. I am all for freedom of speech, but not for disingenuous lies presented as fact in public.

      1. magsmagenta 29 Jan, 10:55am

        You have it right here, freedom of speech is not the same as the freedom to lie or slander or misrepresent the facts. That’s what many Americans fail to understand when they use their constitution to justify pushing harmful ideas backed up by inaccurate science.

  9. Isn’t it telling that poverty, corruption, disease, war,injustice, cruelty of all kinds, suffering of kinds to numerous to list don’t seem to concern these “christians” as they continue to obsess about sexuality. I sometimes think I could respect them more if they dropped the camouflage of religion and just came out as haters.

    1. Core Issues Trust, The Christian Institute, Christian Concern and the Christian Legal Centre are the face of Christian Dominionism in UK, like most extremist groups they exploit and promote popular anti-gay prejudice to create division, a them and us polarity which can prove popular with some when they are told that their latent prejudice can be justified by claims that God shares those same anti-gay prejudices which can then quickly escalate into vilification, hatred and brutal violence as seen in Nigeria, Uganda and Russia where the churches have encouraged dangerous levels of homophobia in the name of God and they continue to do so.

    2. BlokeToys 28 Jan, 1:20pm

      It’s not about being “Christian” or even having a faith in a higher power, it’s about the power of the individual and the desperate need for the weak and scared to gain power and control over others. Religion is a ponzi scheme of dictatorial desire.

      You’re right to point out what little they do about genuine problems in the world, but this is simply because they do not care, it doesn’t give them that sense of power that they crave. It’s not about being faithful and convicted followers of religion, it’s about a desperate need to have dominance over others.

      This is proven in their behavior. If they were what they claim to be, they would all be living in poverty and helping the vulnerable, weak, impoverished and disadvantaged. But you won’t find any of these people doing that, because all they want is control over others.

      1. Yes indeed, this is one of the reasons that if I was 100% heterosexual I would strongly support equality in order to deny these potentially dangerous control freaks influence.

  10. Mihangel apYrs 28 Jan, 10:05am

    so, what other false adverts will they allow?

  11. Kuffir with Attitude 28 Jan, 11:06am

    Well done Bojo,
    How about supporting an Ad campaign freeing people from religion ?

    “Not Muslim Ex-Muslim Post-Muslim and Proud. Get over it.”

    Now that would make a few more buses go boom

  12. Robert in S. Kensington 28 Jan, 1:09pm

    We have recently witnessed Andrea Minichiello Williams endorsing harsher anti-gay laws in Jamaica comparable to Uganda’s hate law. To think she’s a member of the CofE Synod and nobody takes her to task.

    1. dtnorth 28 Jan, 1:32pm

      That woman is a religious brain addled evil bitch that knows nothing of the so called Christian doctrines she claims to covet.

      If she had even read her “good book” she would find that as a woman she should just shut her mouth and let men speak. She missed that bit.

  13. BlokeToys 28 Jan, 1:13pm

    It’s a little concerning that TfL didn’t have the wherewithal to look into the breaches of the Equalities Act and European Human Rights law in the beginning when this was a much publicized issue. Perhaps if they had made this connection then it would never have needed to go to this level?

    The based their refusal solely on their own internal rules, and I feel that left them in a weaker position than they would have been in if they had pointed out the breaches of UK and European law.

    It’s great to see TfL being backed in this argument. Freedom of speech and opinion does not grant religious nutters a free pass to attack and insult whole swathes of a community.

    We should have laws against US citizens coming here to preach Christian-based bigotry just as we refuse Islamic hate preachers and Fascists. We know many of these religious groups are at least partly based in the US.

  14. Yesh U R 28 Jan, 4:33pm

    http://www.core-issues.org/uploads/Letter_to_MD_11th_April_20131.pdf “Dr” Davidson gets a swift kick up the backside.

    http://freethinker.co.uk/2013/02/25/lunatic-ex-gay-christian-group-challenges-anti-gay-poster-ban/ Posted in: Charlatans, Christian Fundies, and how very accurate too.

  15. If anything the Anti gay advert is an infringement of the stonewall one …

  16. “Post Not Gay! Post Ex-Gay, Ex-Post-Gay and Proud. Get over it!”

  17. magsmagenta 29 Jan, 10:48am

    I’d like to know why the Core Issues Trust can still call themselves a charity, isn’t there any way this can be revoked?

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