UK Christian legal group threatens to sue city council over pride flag display: 'Secular religious ideology'

Michie said:

The group claims the display, which is scheduled to go up on June 22 and remain until next month, is implicitly threatening to those who disagree with LGBT ideology.

Click to expand...

This will hardly constitute a legal case. IMO.

Christians in woke countries (like in the UK) should come up with something more solid. Anyway, what are Muslims in London saying to this?

Michie said:

A Christian legal group in the United Kingdom is threatening to sue a city council in London for allegedly promoting a secular ideological agenda by displaying more than 300 Progress Pride flags on an iconic street.

Christian Concern, which is based in London and often represents Christians alleging discrimination in the U.K. and elsewhere, issued a press release earlier this week criticizing Westminster City Council for its annual tradition of replacing the U.K.'s national Union Jack flags on Regent Street with Progress Pride flags.

The group claims the display, which is scheduled to go up on June 22 and remain until next month, is implicitly threatening to those who disagree with LGBT ideology.

Continued below.

UK Christian legal group threatens to sue city council over pride flag display: 'Secular religious ideology'

A Christian legal group in the United Kingdom is threatening to sue a city council in London for allegedly promoting a secular ideological agenda by displaying more than 300 Progress Pride flags on

www.christianpost.com

Click to expand...

This is really the acceptance and legalisation of sin. Since when has pride become a virtue. It use to be a sin.

These elected officials have no idea of the reality of which they endorce. The representation of pride is so much more than just equality. It comes with an ideology that distorts reality and allows immorality.

I remember reading somewhere recently that as the issue of whether Pride parades were family friendly as part of the marketing the organisers were advised to tone down the sextual content and erotica.

The organisers refused and said that 'kink' was an important and integeral expression of Pride. The mind boggles as to what exactly that means. Now sexual erotica and kink is celebrated as a good thing in expressing oneself. But then this has been cultivated within social norms anyway so its only copying mainstream society.

I mean why is it that this aspect is so integeral. If men had a march that was to define them I am sure if they had half naked women and blokes mimicking sexual acts with them or old men surrounded by sexually provocative young women then there would be outrage if it was presented as a family friendly event.

Why is sexual expression to the point of weird kinky stuff seen as a good moral trait to show off to others. Surely a persons worth is more than sex or getting your rocks off with expessing sexual pleasures.

I think originally the gay and lesbian marches were pretty low key. But since the T and Q + have ome along its branched into almost any expression of self as the moral and real identity a person has the right to be and celebrate.

I think there was a movement to seperate the LGB from the rest. The poor 'I' really have nothing to do with Pride in this sense. They are by general acknowledgement belonging to a larger group who have various birth disorders which has nothing to do with gender identity or sexual orientation. Just because its related to sex development does mean they have issues in the head about this that they don't identify with their nate sex.