Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, met many marchers at Downing St before the annual event took place. Protests by right wing groups and some religious organisations failed to damped the spirits. The Prime Minister's wife joined the head ot the marrch as it made its way through central London.
A small group of peaceful national front protesters stood at the bottom of Regent St holding banners against the promotion of homosexuality and some other groups used loud hailers. Some men kissed in front of the protesters drawing huge cheers.
Mayor of London, Boris Johnson was unable to attend but sent his support for the event saying London was "open generous and welcoming".
The Prime Minister had described the creation of civil partnerships as one of a set of "massive strides towards equality" for the gay community made under Labour - "often in the face of fierce opposition".
However, Pride founder Peter Tatchell has described civil partnerships for same-sex couples as "a form of sexual apartheid". He said "Gordon and Sarah can marry, gays can't. End the ban on gay marriage". Mr Tatchell is angry that gay couples in the UK cannot marry in the same way as heterosexual couples unlike in countries like Spain and Canda where gay couples have the exact same right to marry.
-
-
-
-
- graemesmith
- added this
-
Sin is sin, no matter how much it's "in." A disordered appetite which is essentially self indulgent.
-
-
-
-
- unclecharlie
- 4 months ago
-
-
At what point did you decide it was a sin?
Was it the bit of leviticus you read that specifically mentions homosexuality? Or was it elsewhere as it's only mentioned once. Jesus certainly never spoke about homosexuality and people have only had a problem with it in relatively recent history.If we are calling homosexuality a sin on the basis of the line from leviticus then I am afraid you will also be getting sent to hell on the basis of wearing two different kinds of fabric as well. I presume you also think it was entirely reasonable for the old testament god to ask people to kill their own children as a sign of commitment.
The bible is a loose collection of works that a commission of people decided to place under the one collective name. There have been books and sections omitted and added over time.
Your argument of "sin is sin" is flawed. You have no evidence other than that highly questionable phrase in leviticus that it is against "god's" will, the concept of homosexuality being a recent invention that is "in" is totally flawed also as there is evidence of homosexual behaviour being accepted as a part of every day life in ancient times. In fact if anything is recent - its the idea that people who are gay are sinners, that is a theory that has become popular in the last couple of hundred years.
And what about all that homosexual activity in the animal kingdom that we keep seeing evidence of all the time.
I'm afraid your brief one sentence argument is totally flawed on every level possible.
-
-
-
-
- graemesmith
- 4 months ago
-
