please login to add to this item

Christian Congress Traditional Values advert banned by ASA

Gay Aim: Abolish The Family

Wednesday, 6 February 2008

Who ever said it wasn’t worth complaining? In a culture where heads down say nothing seems to be the preferred method of dealing with life’s less agreeable moments it was good to see a little complaining going a long way this week. The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), an independent body set up by the advertising industry to police the rules laid down in the advertising codes, upheld a complaint made against a recent advert by The Christian Congress for Traditional Values (CCTV). A mobile poster for the CCTV showed a family consisting of a man, a woman and a young son and daughter. The copy beside it, alongside details of CCTV website and logo stated "GAY AIM: ABOLISH THE FAMILY."

The complainant believed the ad suggested all gay people were against families and family values. He challenged whether this was an accurate representation of the views of gay people and if the ad was likely to cause serious or widespread offence or condone anti-social behaviour. The CCTV responded saying they believed “the common understanding in the UK of what constituted a family was a married man and woman, both of whom had been born in that gender, and their children” and it was legitimate for them to state their opinion. They believed the campaigners who sought same-sex marriage did not do so simply to achieve the same domestic situation that was available to heterosexuals but also because they aimed to redefine and abolish the traditional family. CCTV cited the 1971 Gay Liberation Front Manifesto documents which described the traditional family unit (husband, wife and children) as working against homosexuality, and which stated, "We must aim at the abolition of the family."

They did acknowledge the ad might have caused offence or irritation but stated they did not intend the ad to result in violent reaction or antisocial behaviour. However the ASA, although noting the CCTV’s belief in the legitimacy of their argument, felt that in the absence of information to the contrary, the statement was likely to be understood to represent the prevailing view of the gay community. They noted the evidence brought by the CCTV regarding the gay community speaking out against the family but felt that as this was based on evidence mainly from a document published by the Gay Liberation Front, a radical gay group that disbanded nearly 30 years ago. They believed that it did not reflect the stance taken by today's mainstream campaigns by the gay community, which expressed a desire for the responsibilities of gay people caring for children to be equal with those of heterosexual people. They also pointed out that a family unit today was increasingly less likely to necessarily comprise a married man and woman and their children. And in conclusion the ASA found the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 and told the CCTV to ensure future campaigns were not presented in a way that could cause serious or widespread offence or which might lead to antisocial behaviour.

In a month when we celebrate our diverse LGBT history it seems the archives are still being raided for more bigoted means.