Christian group challenges ban on gay poster campaign

[-:Undertaker:-]

Christian group challenges ban on gay poster campaign

Boris Johnson will this week face claims in the High Court that he failed to respect a Christian group’s right to free speech by banning their posters from the side of London buses.

Mr Johnson’s role puts him in charge of Transport for London, which is responsible for approving advertising on buses in the city

The Mayor of London refused to run the advertisements which promoted the group’s view that homosexuals can be “reoriented” through therapy and prayer.

Mr Johnson said the ads by the Core Issues Trust were offensive to gays, and said they could even spark retaliation against the wider Christian community.

The posters said “Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud. Get over it!” and was in response to a previous poster campaign by Stonewall, the gay rights group, which said: “Some people are gay. Get over it!”

Mr Johnson’s role puts him in charge of Transport for London, which is responsible for approving advertising on buses in the city.

On Thursday Dr Mike Davidson, the head of the trust, and his supporters will go to the High Court to claim Mr Johnson’s ban on their poster campaign should be reversed on the grounds that he unlawfully stifled free speech.

They are bringing a judicial review and Dr Davidson is hoping Transport for London (TfL) will be forced to accept the advertisements.

They argue that other advertising campaigns - including Stonewall’s, and campaigns for underwear - have been allowed TfL.

“This is all about being free to talk about these issues,” said Dr Davidson, who himself has a homosexual past, but has been attracted controversy for suggesting gays can become heterosexual through counselling and prayer.

“It was a mistake to assume these views we were expressing came from entrenched homophobia, and failed to recognise that people who want to walk away from their homosexual feelings are a group in their own right.”

He has instructed Paul Diamond, the human rights barrister, in this week’s case.

Stifling debate by banning their advert amounted to discrimination, the trust will argue.

They will point in particular to one poster which some Christians found offensive. Funded by Richard Dawkins, the academic, and the British Humanist Association in 2009, it said: “There’s probably no God. Now stop worrying. And enjoy your life.”

Andrea Williams, director of the Christian Legal Centre, which is supporting Dr Davidson’s case, said: “The ban on these advertisements was the beginning of a kind of reverse discrimination which threatens to obliterate debate in the public sphere.

“Boris Johnson needs to realise his mistake and ensure there is freedom for all in the marketplace of ideas. He cannot prefer one group over another.”

A Transport for London spokesman said: “The advertisement breached TfL’s advertising policy as in our view it contained a publicly controversial message and was likely to cause widespread offence to members of the public.”

Absolutely right, and I wish them luck in the court case. Whether you agree with the message or not, it is surely a cause for concern that socially conservative and Christian views are being stifled when the views of radical groups such as Stonewall and Tatchell and being allowed to be aired. It ought to be neither get their say or they both do - within the realm of respectful disagreement of course.

What's ironic is that Johnson and TFL claim that the billboards are likely to cause widespread offence - what about the offence caused by the endless pro-homosexual campaigns (that are funded by the state) to Christians, social conservatives and even Muslims and so on? as they say, diversity and causing offence is a one way street. I have always said that you have no right to not be offended anyway - but if we do have the right to not be offended, then surely the logic is that that given 'right' applies to everybody? (which of course is ridiculous if you take it to its logical conclusion).

Thoughts?

[Inseriousity.]

Suggesting that homosexuality can be cured doesn't sound like "respectful" disagreement at all.
On the other hand, I think people can easily make up their own mind about this and I think the majority would say 'what a load of tosh' and move on.

[Ardemax]

Though I don't agree that people can be "un-gayed" through counselling, I think it's sad to see that an increasing number of Christian groups are being discriminated against in the courts from the word go.

It probably has something to do with the decline of moral in our culture, but that's for a different thread.

[sex]

you're calling stonewall a radical group yet not these people who probably want to cure your homosexuality with electroshock therapy or something lol......ok...

its obviously lying... as there is no proof this "treatment" works.......FALSE ADVERTISEMENT ETC

[-:Undertaker:-]

you're calling stonewall a radical group yet not these people who probably want to cure your homosexuality with electroshock therapy or something lol......ok...

its obviously lying... as there is no proof this "treatment" works.......FALSE ADVERTISEMENT ETC

Oh no both are radical obviously, the difference is that Stonewall recieves state funding whilst the Christian groups (including the radical ones who offer electroshock treatment) aren't funded by the state - thats the big difference. See, although you may disagree with those sort of Christian groups & their methods - at least it's voluntary. If I wanted to go for electroshock treatment, that'd be entirely my choice paid for out of my own pocket - something the likes of Stonewall and other groups cannot stand and constantly push to outlaw. That should be my choice, not the choice of Stonewall and co.

I simply think both sides ought to be treated the same (both allowed to advertise, or neither) and that neither should recieve state funding.

[dbgtz]

Oh god these posters are pinned up all around my college and they're so damn annoying. Anyway that's beside the point, I'd agree on the whole both sides treated equally stance.

[FlyingJesus]

I don't like Stonewall as they're overly militant and (as most radicals do) refuse to accept any provable facts that don't fit with their world view. That said, there's no comparing a sign saying "some people are gay" (which is clearly quite true) and one saying that you can be cured by praying (which is quite clearly offensive as it refers to homosexuality as a disease - which is scientifically untrue), but regardless it's absolutely at the discretion of those who own the buses surely - in this case albeit indirectly that role does fall to BoJo

[GommeInc]

Both groups need a kick in the shins and both advertisements should of been banned from being shown on London buses. No one ought to care about idealistic rubbish from both parties. Take the high ground and ignore both.