This post is a reply to another post.
I think you are twisting this story a bit.
First of all the home is publicly funded and has failed to comply with the terms of the grant. If you check your facts you will find that the UK-Government specifically states the home must be open to the gay and lesbian community and that it must demonstrate this to qualify for funding.
"In the absence of any willingness to do this, funding has been withdrawn."
In other words, there is no more discrimination going on than usual, an LGBT-home would not have gotten away with excluding christians.
A council spokesperson said: "We have never expected any residents to answer questions about their sexuality if they preferred not to do so."
No one was forced to answer the questions but the question must be asked. It's a matter of a few ticks on a form.
I suspect the real problem is this:
"They felt they had come to Pilgrim Homes because of its Christian ethos and were upset they were not protected from such intrusions."
That's right, these people want to "protect" their patients from the intrusion of reailty in the form of a few square-centimeters of paper.
As for the Stonewall presentation it is important that the staff be able to handle their gay patients (that they claim they have) with respect. I'm sure the staff is hardly in their 90's and need to be protected against this intrusion of reality.
In short I think you are way off on this one and could do much better than making birds of a feather.
Link to original blogpost