Actually, it's just a rude and childish response to a childish and rude advert from Stonewall. I especially dislike the 'get over it' bit which always strikes me as a discussion shtdown atthe level of third year school pupils.
Both parties should get over themselves.
I suppose these people have as much right to oppose homosexuality as homosexuals have to organise gay pride marches and ram their sexuality down everyones throat offensive or not:mad:
I suppose these people have as much right to oppose homosexuality as homosexuals have to organise gay pride marches and ram their sexuality down everyones throat offensive or not:mad:
It's only homophobes who claim sexuality is rammed down people's throats
non-homophobes just don't care or support LBGT people
I suppose these people have as much right to oppose homosexuality as homosexuals have to organise gay pride marches and ram their sexuality down everyones throat offensive or not:mad:
Neither have any intrinsic right. Society bestows rights and I'm afraid it has decided that their is no right for the anti-homosexual to spout their message.
You may not agree, but then society is a collective, not an individual.
Personally I found the Ad disgusting. I didn't choose to be gay, it's just the way God made me and God isn't meant to make mistakes. I find it very sad that some people can't accept gay people. We are no different to anyone else. The original Stonewall Ad I like because it's not taunting, it's making a point. Its trying to get society to include us rather than exclude. In theory we are all meant to be equal in this world. Sadly we are not. The Ad should not have gotten to the stage it did. I am glad it's been axed now
The fact that some poor children are born with servere disabilities ( because of fawlty genes ) would suggest that -
a) God does make mistakes
b) There is no God
I'm not homophobic BTW, just pointing out something that popped to mind with the BIB part.
I suppose these people have as much right to oppose homosexuality as homosexuals have to organise gay pride marches and ram their sexuality down everyones throat offensive or not:mad:
I don't ram my sexuality down anyone's throat. Have you been to a gay pride event? It's essentially about acceptance not just outside the gay community but also inside it too. It is also an excuse for a good party. There are many different gay people... Disabled, handicapped, gay, lesbian, transgendered etc etc and its promotion of the acceptance of all because there is discrimination amongst ourselves, not just from some straight people. When you have someone putting you down for your sexual orientation, making innuendos and making hateful, bullying comments get back to me! We are not ramming our sexuality down your throat, merely making a point that we are gay and that it's acceptable and a way of life.
What is "false information" on the following advertising slogan?
Not gay! Ex-gay, post-gay and proud. Get over it!'
It's the suggestion sexual orientation can be switched, changed, by therapy.
If it was about a predominantly homosexual bisexual being encouraged towards heterosexual relationships, that would be different.
Not gay: Would a person be not gay any more because of the therapy, or not acting on it? Ex-gay? Sexuality can change over time, but because of this therapy? Post-gay. Like post traumatic stress?
I suppose these people have as much right to oppose homosexuality as homosexuals have to organise gay pride marches and ram their sexuality down everyones throat offensive or not:mad:
Should people have similar rights then to oppose black people, or oppose people who wear glasses, or oppose women with large breasts?
If people are born a certain way, how can you "oppose" it?
The fact that some poor children are born with servere disabilities ( because of fawlty genes ) would suggest that -
a) God does make mistakes
b) There is no God
I'm not homophobic BTW, just pointing out something that popped to mind with the BIB part.
Well I wasn't saying it like it was fact. lol...
My attitude is that if people want to believe in God then let them. No one has any right to tell someone what is real and what isn't. I like to believe that there is something after this life and to an extent I do believe in God. I don't necessarily believe in the bible. Sure, I like some of the morals and values that are in it like love thy neighbour etc but it's a book written by man years after the events were said to have taken place. Religion can be a dangerous topic and is the source of many arguments and wars.
Well I wasn't saying it like it was fact. lol...
My attitude is that if people want to believe in God then let them. No one has any right to tell someone what is real and what isn't. I like to believe that there is something after this life and to an extent I do believe in God. I don't necessarily believe in the bible. Sure, I like some of the morals and values that are in it like love thy neighbour etc but it's a book written by man years after the events were said to have taken place. Religion can be a dangerous topic and is the source of many arguments and wars.
Doctors in a mental hospital do. Because until you accept what they say, you ain't getting out!
'I disagree with what you say but I will defend to death your right to ban it' - Judge Mental.
I find the cheering on of censorship because some people might be a bit offended to be much more offensive and in most cases counter-productive to the debate. I also feel that this is also down to the OPs ongoing campaign against the Christian religion.
I agree with the following comment on the link:
Censorship should be used as rarely as possible. Aside from trampling on the principal of free speech even for speech you don't agree with, censoring often empowers the very words its meant to undermine.
How would you feel is a bus carried an advertisement saying that people could be "cured" of being a particular skin colour? Surely this is along those lines, as if a person is gay, that's clearly who they are. Even the author of what is viewed to be the "ex-gay" study last week stated that people have totally misunderstood and misrepresented the study to attack gay people. There's nothing to cure, there's nothing to change.
If someone is mentally struggling in a society that is obsessed with their sexuality, it's not that individuals fault and allowing them to be sucked in by groups attempting to "cure" their gayness is clearly something that's likely to be damaging.
This simply isn't like a brand of make-up misrepresenting its claims. It's a marginalisation of a group that are seen as "less than" by many in society (hence why their ex-gay organisation exists to begin with).
By all means if people want to be homosexual let them get on with it but please don't constantly ram your sexuality down the throats of the rest of us because we really don't want to know.:rolleyes:
People have a sexual preference, it's not a matter of what they want to be. Are you straight because you actually are, or did you choose to be straight, implying that you're bisexual? The irony of your statement is that you appear to be suggesting that the latter is correct.
Maybe you're like to explain further, assuming that your post isn't drive by drivel?
I'd be inclined to let the adverts run. London's a metropolitan city rather than some backward reactionary part of the world, the advert is a load of old nonsense that would simply remind you of the Stonewall campaign which is all over London's buses rather than the very few these would be on. I just wonder if this is a bit of politicking by Boris for the gay vote in next months election?
I'd be inclined to let the adverts run. London's a metropolitan city rather than some backward reactionary part of the world, the advert is a load of old nonsense that would simply remind you of the Stonewall campaign which is all over London's buses rather than the very few these would be on. I just wonder if this is a bit of politicking by Boris for the gay vote in next months election?
unfortunately it may affect some in terrible and tragic ways
How would you feel is a bus carried an advertisement saying that people could be "cured" of being a particular skin colour? Surely this is along those lines, as if a person is gay, that's clearly who they are. Even the author of what is viewed to be the "ex-gay" study last week stated that people have totally misunderstood and misrepresented the study to attack gay people. There's nothing to cure, there's nothing to change.
If someone is mentally struggling in a society that is obsessed with their sexuality, it's not that individuals fault and allowing them to be sucked in by groups attempting to "cure" their gayness is clearly something that's likely to be damaging.
This simply isn't like a brand of make-up misrepresenting its claims. It's a marginalisation of a group that are seen as "less than" by many in society (hence why their ex-gay organisation exists to begin with).
The advert has nothing to do with stating that someone can be "cured". If you want to ban them doing the "curing" then go ahead, but I struggle to see anything bad in the context of the actual advert itself.
Bringing up the old chestnut of race vs sexuality doesn't really work in this context.
I'd be inclined to let the adverts run. London's a metropolitan city rather than some backward reactionary part of the world, the advert is a load of old nonsense that would simply remind you of the Stonewall campaign which is all over London's buses rather than the very few these would be on. I just wonder if this is a bit of politicking by Boris for the gay vote in next months election?
There are a lot of vulnerable young gay people that don't have the support of families or friends to show them that being gay is good and normal. You and I know the advert is "nonsense", but not everybody would understand that.
I'm glad to hear that Boris Johnson has blocked christian groups from putting adverts on buses that claim that gay people can be 'cured'.
'The full-length advert was due to appear on five different routes in the capital over a two-week period. It is backed by the Core Issues Trust whose leader, Mike Davidson, believes "homoerotic behaviour is sinful". His charity funds "reparative therapy" for gay Christians who believe that they have homosexual feelings but want to become straight. The campaign is also backed by Anglican Mainstream, an worldwide orthodox Anglican group whose supporters have equated homosexuality with alcoholism.
The advert was due to say: "Not gay! Ex-gay, post-gay and proud. Get over it!"
It worries me that these sorts of views may be taking hold in this country and could be propped up by the current government push towards 're-christianising' the UK.
Interested to hear people's views about this.
I am surprised that the posters were even printed. Don't printers have any responsibility for what they print?
Say there's a really girly girl who dreams of a princess marriage to her handsome prince in a pink castle. Or 2.4 kids, marriage, happy surburbia. Ten years later, her options are...Tesco value range turkey baster. :eek: Now some ladies would count their lucky blessings, other's would be more disappointed, to say the least. I put it to you that there will always be people who struggle with being different, no matter what sort of society we are living in.
I suspect they would be straight if they are dreaming of a prince
And of course there will be people who struggle with being different - but shouldn't we start by looking at why they struggle? That's why people who might be unhappy about their sexuality should be given proper, professional counselling.
The advert has nothing to do with stating that someone can be "cured". If you want to ban them doing the "curing" then go ahead, but I struggle to see anything bad in the context of the actual advert itself.
Bringing up the old chestnut of race vs sexuality doesn't really work in this context.
Of course is it. They are effectively saying that people with gay feelings can change their sexuality from gay to straight. It's "pray the gay away", a huge movement, especially it America. It's naive to think that a religious organisation telling people that they can "overcome" homosexual feeling are not effectively advertising reparitive therapy.
Comments
I suppose these people have as much right to oppose homosexuality as homosexuals have to organise gay pride marches and ram their sexuality down everyones throat offensive or not:mad:
It's only homophobes who claim sexuality is rammed down people's throats
non-homophobes just don't care or support LBGT people
What is "false information" on the following advertising slogan?
Not gay! Ex-gay, post-gay and proud. Get over it!'
Neither have any intrinsic right. Society bestows rights and I'm afraid it has decided that their is no right for the anti-homosexual to spout their message.
You may not agree, but then society is a collective, not an individual.
The fact that some poor children are born with servere disabilities ( because of fawlty genes ) would suggest that -
a) God does make mistakes
b) There is no God
I'm not homophobic BTW, just pointing out something that popped to mind with the BIB part.
I don't ram my sexuality down anyone's throat. Have you been to a gay pride event? It's essentially about acceptance not just outside the gay community but also inside it too. It is also an excuse for a good party. There are many different gay people... Disabled, handicapped, gay, lesbian, transgendered etc etc and its promotion of the acceptance of all because there is discrimination amongst ourselves, not just from some straight people. When you have someone putting you down for your sexual orientation, making innuendos and making hateful, bullying comments get back to me! We are not ramming our sexuality down your throat, merely making a point that we are gay and that it's acceptable and a way of life.
It's the suggestion sexual orientation can be switched, changed, by therapy.
If it was about a predominantly homosexual bisexual being encouraged towards heterosexual relationships, that would be different.
Not gay: Would a person be not gay any more because of the therapy, or not acting on it? Ex-gay? Sexuality can change over time, but because of this therapy? Post-gay. Like post traumatic stress?
Should people have similar rights then to oppose black people, or oppose people who wear glasses, or oppose women with large breasts?
If people are born a certain way, how can you "oppose" it?
Well I wasn't saying it like it was fact. lol...
My attitude is that if people want to believe in God then let them. No one has any right to tell someone what is real and what isn't. I like to believe that there is something after this life and to an extent I do believe in God. I don't necessarily believe in the bible. Sure, I like some of the morals and values that are in it like love thy neighbour etc but it's a book written by man years after the events were said to have taken place. Religion can be a dangerous topic and is the source of many arguments and wars.
Doctors in a mental hospital do. Because until you accept what they say, you ain't getting out!
There is no such thing as "ex-gay" or "post-gay", just saddoes suppressing their true selves.
Lol well OK in that case maybe but in general not so much
How would you feel is a bus carried an advertisement saying that people could be "cured" of being a particular skin colour? Surely this is along those lines, as if a person is gay, that's clearly who they are. Even the author of what is viewed to be the "ex-gay" study last week stated that people have totally misunderstood and misrepresented the study to attack gay people. There's nothing to cure, there's nothing to change.
If someone is mentally struggling in a society that is obsessed with their sexuality, it's not that individuals fault and allowing them to be sucked in by groups attempting to "cure" their gayness is clearly something that's likely to be damaging.
This simply isn't like a brand of make-up misrepresenting its claims. It's a marginalisation of a group that are seen as "less than" by many in society (hence why their ex-gay organisation exists to begin with).
so you want to support freedom for lies that break advertising laws? and also support a homophobic agenda
People have a sexual preference, it's not a matter of what they want to be. Are you straight because you actually are, or did you choose to be straight, implying that you're bisexual? The irony of your statement is that you appear to be suggesting that the latter is correct.
Maybe you're like to explain further, assuming that your post isn't drive by drivel?
unfortunately it may affect some in terrible and tragic ways
The advert has nothing to do with stating that someone can be "cured". If you want to ban them doing the "curing" then go ahead, but I struggle to see anything bad in the context of the actual advert itself.
Bringing up the old chestnut of race vs sexuality doesn't really work in this context.
There are a lot of vulnerable young gay people that don't have the support of families or friends to show them that being gay is good and normal. You and I know the advert is "nonsense", but not everybody would understand that.
I am surprised that the posters were even printed. Don't printers have any responsibility for what they print?
I suspect they would be straight if they are dreaming of a prince
And of course there will be people who struggle with being different - but shouldn't we start by looking at why they struggle? That's why people who might be unhappy about their sexuality should be given proper, professional counselling.
Of course is it. They are effectively saying that people with gay feelings can change their sexuality from gay to straight. It's "pray the gay away", a huge movement, especially it America. It's naive to think that a religious organisation telling people that they can "overcome" homosexual feeling are not effectively advertising reparitive therapy.