Why Pride is the Marketized Subversion of Christian Morality

The Anti-Christian Rebellion at the Heart of the LGBT+ Movement

Even the non-Christians who quietly disagree with Gay Pride don’t realise that they disagree with it because it is an explicit rejection of the Christian morality that shaped their society.

Pride is a cacophony of contradictions. It claims to be about one thing, when in reality it is about the opposite thing, undermining the very thing it claims to stand for. As I will explore below, this is a cultural rebellion against Christian values in particular.

The Fruit of Pride

I will illustrate this cacophony by offering some lines of commentary to a typical marketing pitch on the website for this year’s London Pride event before reflecting further on the implications for what we call Christendom.

As you read it, notice what Pride deigns to offer its would-be disciples. It is more than an act of public recognition, it is an alternative religion; and not just any religion, but an explicitly anti-Christian religion, rejecting its morals and mimicking its fruits. It promises love, joy, truth, freedom, beauty, community, and an empowered boldness to be “born again” not in Christ but in Pride.

It was the sin of pride, of course, that undergirded Satan’s own rebellion against God (Ezek. 28:17), and was unsurprisingly his first temptation to humans too (Gen. 3:5), that we might reject God’s standards and replace them with our own (Rom. 1:25), seeking to become like God ourselves.

It was pride that Christ Himself ultimately scorned at the Cross despite its shame (Heb. 12:2), pouring himself out for those who rejected Him that they only repent and turn to Him and receive His love. But rather than pouring contempt on their own pride (Gal. 6:14), so many second-hand inheritors of Christianity in our time have instead poured contempt on Christ’s love itself, asserting that Christ ought to “excuse” our sin rather than save us from it.

This is why Pride is especially emblematic of a post-Christian society. It is not merely an assertion of confidence in self-expression. It is a glorification of the very thing a person must put down—our sinful rebellion against God’s ways—in order to accept Christ. The watching public, who had themselves become apathetic to the demands of true Christian faith in Christian societies, were all too easily seduced by this temptation to see darkness in an altogether different light.

The essence of Pride’s rebellion, and the cleverly devised lies on which this rebellion is fuelled, can be seen in any number of the public statements which promote it to the public, not least that of London Pride, to which I now turn.

A Commentary on London Pride’s Manifesto

I will quote and comment on each part of the text in sequence:

“June is a time to honour both the struggles and celebrations that define our LGBTQ+ community.”

It’s interesting how even the taking-over of a whole month mimics the notion of a Christian “holiday”. Granted, Christianity did this to the pagans first, but it still demonstrates the aforementioned religiosity of Pride, the “sacralising” of special feast days and months in which all of society is expected to participate. Companies that don’t participate are publicly shamed.

But whilst Pride Month comes but once a year, in another sense it is always with us. June is merely a very public reminder of the New Morality to which the West gradually chose to subject itself over the last several decades. We are still living in light of its dark fruits.

“We remember the courage of those who fought for our rights when the world seemed against them, the activists who refused to stay silent, and the countless individuals who paved the way for the freedoms we celebrate today.”

There was a time when Christian society was still tolerant of homosexuals without allowing them to come into the mainstream to indoctrinate future generations, even from nursery. It is those who “refused to stay silent” that sought for more and more “tolerance”, claiming that the immorality was not in their own sexual desires but in their society’s rejection of them. This is how light came to be called “darkness”, and good came to be called “bad” (Isa. 5:20).

These activists who “refused to stay silent” are the martyrs of the new religion. Yet it is not the individuals but the expressive individualism that paved the way for what formerly Christian societies so glibly “celebrate” today. Ironically, contrary to its claims, it has not shaped individuals who think for themselves; it has shaped an ideological Crowd who dare not call the dogma of Pride into question lest they be shamed, mocked, sacked, or arrested.

Even Douglas Murray, a homosexual, noticed this in The Madness of Crowds, that we had moved from a time in which it had become more socially dangerous to move away from LGBT+ convictions than to embrace them openly, especially those who might describe themselves as “ex-Gay”. It is they who were now more likely to feel the need to have their voices dubbed and their faces hidden when interviewed on camera about their experience or their views.

Why? Because the freedom of such inconvenient people to reject homosexuality is not tolerated by the aforementioned courageous freedom-fighters of the Pride movement.

“But Pride is also about joy - the unbridled happiness of living authentically, the power of love in all its forms, and the beautiful diversity that makes our community so vibrant.”

This is another feature of the superficial nature of Pride. Pride is not beautiful or diverse in practice, of course; what it “creates” is in fact ugly and monotonous. It desecrates the beauty of the created order and delights in its corruption. It does not allow for genuine difference because it cannot stomach genuine disagreement. Pride cannot abide those who are not Proud. It harbours an insatiable desire to crush any genuine diversity that would divert its adherents from its designated path. You are either with them or you are against them as an “oppressor”.

This is why there is always such backlash against the aforementioned converts from homosexuality. Such people do not receive the “unbridled happiness of living authentically” as promised so freely by London Pride. They are instead slandered as traitors. The Proud don’t know what to do with such people other than to explain them away, accusing them of living “inauthentically” or worse, as victims of brainwashing via “conversion therapy”.

Why does Pride—so apparently besotted with “unbridled happiness”—react so strongly against any attempts to divert someone away from homosexual desire? If it’s about people “living authentically” why could their authenticity not be manifested in a heterosexual life, with a spouse of the opposite sex and natural children, and by a rejection of the homosexual lifestyle? Because Pride tells lies. It does not want to beautify society but to uglify it. Despite all the colours of the rainbow in its advertising, Pride seeks to make society a monochrome place, where all people assent to its dogmas without protest, without comment, lest they cause offence to the new gods of the “vibrant community”.

This is by no means “the power of love”; it is a rebellion against the Biblical love on which our societal foundations were built, a love that is patient, kind, unenvious, unboastful (unproud!), and “does not insist on its own way” (1Cor. 13:4-5). Understood Biblically, declaring that “Love is love” is another way of saying “Love is not love” because it insists that their interpretation of love must win out over ours. The point is not who has the “right” view of love. Love is not “ours” to interpret. God decides what love is because God is love (1John 4:8). We follow His way of love (or we don’t) and are blessed (or cursed) accordingly.

“It's about dancing in the streets, embracing who we are, and creating spaces where everyone can shine.”

And what of the impressionable children who witness this “dancing in the streets”? What about the scantily clad men gyrating in front of them? This is not about making “everyone shine”, it is about making darkness shine as though it is light.

Nor is it even possible to make everyone shine. To “shine” necessitates difference, and this necessitates someone or something not shining by contrast. We see the stars in the sky because of the mass expanse of non-stars in the space they occupy. This is how God created the world, with borders, with clear separation of night and day, land and sea, man and woman (Gen. 1-2).

Pride is the erosion of this difference. It seeks to elevate its immorality in contrast to the morality it rejects in the hope of establishing it as the new norm, embracing the new “we” of the pro-LGBT+ community, which apparently must include all of us, one way or another, because any opposition to it is greeted with disdain or shame.

“The journey towards equality continues, and every step forward is built on both resilience through hardship and the infectious joy of being true to ourselves. Together, we transform struggle into strength and celebration into change.”

Being true to ourselves requires a regard for “truth”, not delusion. The “journey towards equality” in Pride is a ruse, promising some sought-after utopia. In this utopia, all are magically happy and tolerant of one another not because they have become repentant, not because they have been redeemed, not because they have been touched by the Spirit of God, but because they have made the decision to reject the truth of God so that they may be “true to themselves”.

There is no real end in sight of this mythical “journey”. Every God-given boundary from which Pride “liberates” itself is just another excuse to transgress another one. The journey has no destination because it is animated by the worship of Self. This is indeed “infectious”, but it is by no means a path to “joy”. It is rooted in weaponised discontent which can never be satiated because it is in perpetual rebellion against God.

Notice the contrast between the “celebration” of Pride and that of the parable Jesus told of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15. The prodigal could not find joy in his reckless living as he squandered his inheritance, nor in eating with the pigs (15:13-16). It was only when he came to his senses, when he said “Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you. I am no longer worthy to be called your son.” (15:21). Only then could he receive the joyous embrace of his father, who then gives him the best robe, ring, shoes, laying on a great feast, saying: “For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.’ And they began to celebrate.” (15:24).

The essence of Pride is that it wants the joy, feasting, and celebration without the repentance that turns them back to the true source of joy. It wants to be found whilst remaining lost.

“Join us in advancing these vital conversations at Pride in London's Free Human Rights Forum on 28th June 2025 - where we'll explore the path ahead and continue building a more inclusive world for all. Let’s Rise. Reclaim. Resist”

These concluding exhortations sound like something out of the Communist Manifesto, rallying the comrades into the utopian future filled with never-ending rainbows. The great delusion here is that they are in need of “rising” or “reclaiming” or “resisting” at all. In light of the last several decades, what is there left to reclaim? They’ve already taken marriage. They’ve already secured the rights to adopt babies. They’re already indoctrinating primary children in schools and nurseries. Have they not already conquered? Who is there left to resist?

Who is really standing against them? Not even the church leaders will stand up to them. Half the churches have been busy welcoming Pride into their pulpits; the other half have been cowering in fear that even their mild disagreement with LGBT+ might be found out by a comrade of the Pride “resistance” and reported to the Utopian authorities.

Pride as an Offence to Christianity

As I noted in the introduction, Pride is a particularly anti-Christendom phenomenon, undermining the Christian foundations it had inherited.

Although homosexuality may seem to be equally offensive to Muslims (and it is), those who practice it are not putting two fingers up against Islam, but putting two fingers up against Christianity. That’s why we feel the effects of Pride more, not because Muslims are not equally opposed to LGBT+ but because Pride was conceived and birthed within Christian cultures and nations, places where Christian morality was the rooted tree from which the Proud rebelled.

Pride has been the wrecking ball to the Christian morality on which western civilization was built. I expect this is also why Muslims do not tend to “go to town” opposing it, even if they certainly do voice their discontent as and when it impacts their own communities (e.g. schools). As one Imam (Mohammad Tawhidi) infamously said, Muslims will often align politically with Leftist progressive agendas because they know that’s their best chance of making a culture Muslim, hence why they’re happy for the Leftist elites to “get busy with LGBT+”.

Whether that Imam speaks for many Muslims in the West or not, the strategy makes sense. The Islamists will not necessarily oppose leftism eroding the existing moral foundations in the West because it clears the way for Islam to take root and grow in influence within western nations, after which it will certainly oppose things like Pride, but in a very different way to Christianity.

This doesn’t mean Christians cannot agree with Muslims in relation to our critique of Pride. I was interviewed by Muslims in my home several weeks ago for a TV documentary on LGBT+ invasions into Muslim nations, for example.

Christians have often been so soft and cowardly on this issue that most Muslims tend to lose any respect for Christian morality as a result but we actually found lots of common ground with respect to moral norms, despite our obvious wider disagreements.

Challenging Pride can actually be a helpful evangelistic bridge to Muslims, not least when we own the fact that Pride is an aberration of Christian values in particular by divorcing virtues like joy, love, and freedom, from truth, justice, and judgement.

Why Christians Must Oppose Pride

Two years ago I wrote an article entitled Why Pride Can and Should Be Opposed. This was about the need to counteract the undermining of Christian moral norms in our culture as a longer term way to love your neighbour (including your manipulated “LGBT+” neighbour) due to the disastrous consequences of de-normalising Christian moral norms. We let it get to this state in the West because too few were willing to oppose Pride.

Even conservative Christians have been so keen to not be called “judgemental” in recent years that they have usually avoided opposing Pride at all. Ironically, this often makes them judgemental against their few fellow Christians who do oppose Pride in some way. Many Christians still technically disagree with LGBT+ and Pride, but do not want to be seen to oppose it.

Just last week a good friend of mine went to a Pride parade (on his own) as a peaceful counter-demonstrator. He simply held up a sign that said: “I’m Not Proud” and gave out copies of a book of the Bible. At some point during the event he was attacked by one of the happy tolerant inclusivists in the Pride brigade and had his sign unceremoniously smashed up.

Surprisingly, the security team leader at the parade, having observed this man’s peaceful protest for the hour prior to his sign being vandalised, told him quietly: “If it was up to me you’d get an even bigger sign.”

Even though it seems to have conquered, even though its influence appears unwavering, Pride is not actually as powerful as it seems. It has been one of the best marketed lies of modern times and has hoodwinked many, to the detriment of many. Yet it is still a lie. It still pushes against created nature and so it will always be travelling “uphill” as it were. Those who stand against it faithfully are doing the work of the kingdom, standing up for righteousness for the long-term good of their nation (cf. Prov. 14:34).

The cultural Vibe Shift to the Right is a real thing. Even if it may still take years for its effects to be felt, I believe an increasing number of westerners are becoming sick of Pride, recognising its wider corrosive effects on our society. Pushing back against the LGBT+ takeover is not as inconceivable as it once seemed.

Church, Culture, Salt, and Light

Some of my newer readers may not know that a couple of years ago I was fired from my “evangelical” Bible college for stating that homosexuality was “invading the Church”. When Calvin Robinson interviewed me on GB News about it at the time, I said that it’s one thing for homosexuality to come into wider society, but another thing altogether for it to come into the Church. I still stand by that, in terms of the significance of the Church, whose moral foundations ultimately affect everything else.

At that time I wasn’t necessarily attempting to challenge Pride in society (which had already had gay “marriage” for a decade). The incursion into the Church was the priority and the far greater offence. But the two incursions are related. If you leave the world to go to pot, don’t expect it to have no effect on the Church, who was called by Christ to be salt and light within the world lest we ourselves be trampled underfoot (Matt. 5:13-16). As goes the Church, so goes the culture; and as goes the culture, so goes the Church.

Some might say the moral foundations of the modern Church already have fallen, if we look at all the compromises and affairs and abuses and cover-ups of recent decades. This is quite true, but how do we know that such things are “out of place” within the Church? Because of the moral standard still upheld by the faithful witness of the Church!

This is why the Methodist Church voting on gay marriage several years ago was such a catastrophe—not because there were no gay people in the Church before, not because there was no sin in the Church before, but because it was the Church saying that sin is no longer sin, that sin itself could be “baptised” and called something else despite continuing to be sin, telling the Pride prodigals that they may continue eating with the pigs and call it a homely feast.

To be clear: Christians should not oppose Pride because they despise gay people or think of them as lesser human beings; they should oppose Pride because it seeks to reinterpret what sin is by brazenly undermining the foundations of the very Cross that was God’s means of saving them from their sin. Instead of repenting in humility and returning to the father to be welcomed in true joy and feasting, they chose instead to exalt themselves above God’s judgement and God’s mercy, as if they had no need of either.

This is why the need to oppose Pride is more significant than many have realised. Some might even call it “a Gospel issue”.