Pro Gay but not 'Ungay' ads allowed on buses?

So the ruling that Pro Gay ads were allowed on the side of buses but not the 'Ungay' ads is to be challenged in the High Courts.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/02/28/boris-johnsons-ban-of-gay-cure-bus-posters-challenged-in-high-court-by-christian-group-3519569/

Sounds about right as both ad campaigns should have had a chance to air.

Thoughts?

More equal societies do better. I would like to think that to anyone with half a brain cell, it's obvious why the pro-gay ad was allowed and not the homophobic one.

One is promoting tolerance and one is promoting hatred. Pretty clear cut difference if you ask me.

This does not seem in any way equal here. One set of ads was allowed to run while the other was not.

After looking at both, I don't see how you think the statement ‘Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud. Get over it!’ is homophobic.

Oh dear. Do you not think that perhaps 'ex-gay and proud' suggests that there is something wrong with being gay in the first place.

In the context of the sentence it would suggest that person or person(s) were once gay and moved on. And glad/proud to have done so.

After looking at both, I don't see how you think the statement ‘Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud. Get over it!’ is homophobic...

and it is most definitely not promoting hatred, no idea how you determine that.

One is promoting tolerance and one is promoting hatred. Pretty clear cut difference if you ask me.

I answered your question with a genuine answer.

I have no desire to debate with you exclusively, as there are many other users on these forums, but it is a debate topic so replies are helpful.



Maybe it is the way that is is worded that you disagree with, but I get the feeling from your posts that it isn't.

The first ad saying "Some people are gay. Get over it". It's a statement. Pretty neutral.

For example, if the second ad was changed instead said "Some people were once gay, but are no longer gay. Get over it". Again pretty neutral.

But would you have accepted that? Something tells me that its unlikely.

But in any case, you're clearly a bit dense so I won't be contributing any further.

Good. I see no need to be offensive but you obviously do not. So I kindly and gladly part ways.

There is no such thing as a gay 'cure', as is confirmed by hundreds of professional medical and psychological bodies. There is however plenty of evidence that offering such a 'cure' causes psychological damage in the long-run.

I'd like to see people trying to justify it if it were skin bleach, with "ex black and proud" ...

The problem with the ad is being gay is not.something that can be cured nor should it be. So do you not accept this?

Remember that not so long ago people thought homosexuality was horribly "offensive" and would presumably have banned both adverts on decency grounds. Pinning your freedom to the changing whims of the masses is a dangerous game.