Pride and Prejudice in Norway: Volda Church to Take Part in the Pride™ March
And thus the present-day Jacobins advance the annihilation of the family and Christianity, one Pride Month™ at a time
Translation, emphases, and [snark] mine.
Church Takes the Initiative to March in the Pride Parade: Setting Fire to the Comments Section
Bygdepride is being organised for the fifth time, but for the first time Volda Church is inviting people to join them in the parade on Saturday. This is causing controversy.
By Annabelle Kårvåg Sørensen, Mia Sofie Ytreberg, and Remi Sagen, NRK, 6 May 2025 [source]
No thanks! The church doesn't have room for everyone anymore and I’ve now cancelled my membership! Thanks for the team!
Brilliant that they’re taking part in the parade ❤️❤️❤️
Pride? No, the church needs to look at itself in the mirror, read the Bible, follow and be true to God’s word, and stop flirting with the forces of evil.
These are just three of more than 160 comments on the post Volda Church shared on Facebook, and many of them are negative [who would’ve thought…].
I thought we had come so far that we would be able to accept it, then. I don’t really see how it can be something that divides people [why would everybody be obliged to find your point of view great?]
This is according to Anbjørn Steinholm Frislid, leader of Bygdepride Ørsta/Volda, which was first organised in 2018.
He believes they have not yet reached their goal of creating open and inclusive neighbourhoods [perhaps some people don’t want to be forced to find this fine? It appears that this thought has yet to enter Mr. Steinholm’s head…].
This year in particular, we’ve seen that things are going in the wrong direction [no need to cite any example]. And we think it’s even more important that we stand up and say that ‘We actually have to make sure that everyone can feel at home here’ [that is, except those unreconstructed people prefer to be left alone: they, too, *must* be included whether they like it or not]
Writes That They Have Left the Congregation
Chairman of Volda Parish Council, Bernt Krøvel, notes that there are different opinions about partaking in the Pride event, as with everything else. And that they’ve read through all the comments.
Krøvel said that they had decided to participate under the same [‘pride’] banner in the parades as the first speaker [well, what is there to say—other than noting that pride is a cardinal sin].
We want to stand up for diversity [orig. mangfald], and everyone can come together in the church. I believe this was also the main point of Jesus’s message [now, I don’t know what book that dude got this from, but that’s for sure not in the Gospel to be for diversity™]. We know there are people who are homosexual and lesbian in our congregation, and we also want to do something for them [is it just me or does this guy re-invent the church’s message on the fly?].
In the comment section, there are at least two comments by people who say they have left the church over this stance.
Krøvel has noticed this, and he’s not really surprised:
It’s really unfortunate that people leave the Church over this. This has happened before, and not only in Volda.
What do you think about the Church’s participation in the parade?
‘Very good’: 66%; ‘I think that they should stay out of this’: 30%; dunno: 4%. As of 7 May 2025 around 10 a.m. local time, there were 5,770 votes.
Unity of the Church is at Stake
NRK has tried to talk to some who criticised that the church participates in the pride march. Most don’t want to see their name mentioned, and many don’t answer at-all [huhum, would that be because they fear retaliation in small-town Norway? What an inclusive and diverse atmosphere…].
But there is someone who wants to comment on this: Flora Miro. She wrote the comment ‘tragic’ under the Facebook posting:
In my opinion, the Church should keep to its core message about faith and spiritual guidance, and in my opinion, the Church should keep out of political or ideological events. For this reason, I think it is very unfortunate to participate in a pride parade.
From the USA to Norway
One of the commenters points out that, by participating in the pride parade, the Church is more exclusionary than inclusive. This is something the organiser Fislid doesn’t understand:
The Church is a place that everyone can call home and be part of—I don’t see this [participation in the Pride™ parade] as exclusionary [at this point, it is obvious that Mr. Fislid has either not read the Gospel or understood it].
At the end of the day, the people are allowed to love who they want to love, and I fail to see how this doesn’t apply to everybody [this is an opinion, not Church doctrine].
He also of the opinion that those who disagree with the Pride parade are indulging in conspiracy theories while pointing to problems that are not relevant in present-day Norway:
I have preferred not to look at the comment section in the past couple of days, because we see that this [the Pride™ parade] is highly divisive, with the language used on social media hardening now. It is much worse than last year, and the frontlines are hardening.
[NRK] Why do you think this is?
That’s difficult to answer. We are observing several trends, from Trump’s USA to Europe, in Hungary and other countries, where the rights of queer [orig. skeive*] people are infringed [this isn’t true, but whatever, I suppose, at this point].
The same event that we are doing on Saturday in Volda, it is now forbidden in Hungary. That’s why we’re organised internationally to prevent the same things from happening here in Norway.
Bottom Lines
First up, the reason why I bother to bring you these inane pieces is twofold: politics being downstream from culture being a huge part of my motivation (as well as that kind of BS is being peddled in public schools in my Norwegian neck of the woods). The other reason is that, as asinine as these pieces are, they are revealing the ways and means these revolutionaries are using.
I marked the term ‘queer’, or skeiv, with an asterisk (*), and the reason for doing this is simple: originally, it had no connotations and simply mean ‘odd’ or related to angles of less than 90 degrees (in mathematical terms).
Then it became the Norwegian term for ‘gay’—and now it means someone
that violates traditional norms for sexuality, gender, and gender identity
As you can see, this kind of wordplay is intentional, and it points well beyond empty claims that language always evolves (which is true).
While one started out with the notion of decriminalising homosexuality (‘sodomy’, as most criminal codes called it), use of the term ‘queer’ now relates to a whole additional host of unsavoury fetishes that stand at odds with both reality and sanity. For more of this particular aspect, please see:
And then there is the whole ‘mission creep’ aspect of this let’s decriminalise homosexuality spiel: what started with equality under the law has now morphed into something like ‘you’d better be with us [Pride™], because if you’re not, you’re a homophobe, transphobe, and otherwise despicable person’.
In the name of ‘inclusion’ and ‘diversity’, intolerance and totalitarianism has creeped into society. No wonder it’s called ‘highly divisive’ in the above piece, because it is—but that’s also why these wannabe Jacobins do it: to drive people over the edge, to attack Christianity, and to wreck both the family and society at-large.
There is, so to say, method to this madness, and it becomes more clearly visible every day.
Skeiv/skev: slanted; at an (the wrong) angle: "the wooden frame you made is 'skeiv', it won't do"; slang: slightly off in the head, mildly insane; off-kilter; not as it should be.
Used in a sentence:
"Obama var en skev president"/"Obama was a queer president"
As for the church... Swedish former state church loses between 30 000 - 50 000 members per year and have done so for two decades or so now. A development met with either a haughty "good riddance" or "who cares, we're tax-funded anyway and own billions upon billions in stocks, bonds and land - all donated to us by rubes on their death beds!".
Swedish Christians, the ones I meet at charity, quietly and uneasily despise the old state church for becoming what it is.
On the other hand, several hundreds of priests were trained in DDR in the 1970s, to go home to Sweden and join the clergy and subvert the church. Despite the DDR being long gone, they're continuing the plan on automatic.
If you want to read about the deep connections between Sweden and DDR, I recommend the only scientific study on the topic:
Birgitta Almgrens "Inte bara Stasi..."; She is the only researcher ever who has been given access to the archives of SÄPO covering this - all such material is still classified and she was only allowed access to it under guard, and had to - witnessed by officers of the security-police - burn all her notes and demolish the hard drive of her computer upon completion of her research. Further, the manuscript was vetted and edited by the security police, and by demand by the Socialist Democrat party of Sweden and in agreement with the state of Germany, Swedish researchers may not access any documents about Sweden, in the Stasi-archives.
The reason is well-known: the archives name names of politicians, clergy, and other high officials and business-men that were in so deep with the DDR and Stasi they might as well have been East Germans. m/s Estonia was f.e. often used to smuggle weapons and technology otherwise banned from sale to DDR, or to other banned nations using DDR as go-between. Small wonder the Socialist Democrat party of Sweden have blocked real investigations of the wreckage since the ship sank.
Ahem, sorry about ranting but it is highly possible that the Norwegian church has old ties to DDR too, was where I was aiming. Might be worth to ask around.
It's a mystifying dynamic, but I recognize it. It says to me, crazy-arrogant and otherwise dangerously cluelessly projectin' peeps here, so keep your head down, out of range of tomatoes and other flying whatnots, and by the way Twitter assaults, and whilst mildly smiling and gently waving, back away slowly, slowly.... Once at the door, outsky.
So I'm a member of an association that I was rather fond of for some years. I couldn't make it to the annual conference last month, and now I get a followup mass-email from the president of said association about that conference. He was disappointed about the low turn out, but crowing about how inclusive and diverse & etc etc (nothing new there, he's woker than woke, like a good number of the members) and —this is what was new— how wonderful it was to start out the whole shebang with the land acknowledgement ceremony!
In case anyone in Europe was wondering, with the US wokies these days the land acknowledgement as a start-off for a meeting is a "must." The land acknowledgment ceremony, yes.... This involved acknowledging that the land the conference was taking place on had been stolen— yes, the president used the word "stolen"— by white European people from the (fill in the blank) people.
Now I actually know the history of that particular area, and going back a ways, well before European ships sailed anywhere near these shores, as the archeological record shows, it was hotly contested and rife with intertribal violence. But never mind all that.
What really is this "land acknowledgement" thing all about? Why, it is a performative masochistic ritual! We must acknowledge that we, who are so high-status, are very bad, we are in fact thieves, and that the fetishized other (presumably dark skinned and/or victim of fill-in-the-blank) is in need of our oh-so-lofty-and-knowing "special concern." But of course once we say these magic aren't-we-the bees-knees-of-pious words, eff 'em to oblivion & pass the coffee.
Performative masochism, not my thing. Well, membership in that association was nice while it lasted. The president's letter included a survey. I deleted it.
So that's how it falls apart. Now you might say, why so passive? Why not speak up and object? The answer for me is clear. I've been around for awhile. I know perfectly well what that president would do to any member who questioned, never mind actually objected, to such things as the land acknowledgement ceremony. He's got his allies on the board, that's how this happened. I wouldn't get far. It would get very ugly very fast, and mainly ugly for me.
I heed that old saying— "pick your battles." Like I already said, I'm not into masochism. If I had sure allies and a chance of changing things and, moreover, if I cared a whole lot, I'd object. But I don't.
Anyway, I'm sure the conference was a crashing bore of nonstop whinging about the Bad Orange Man. I don't have reason to expect it would be any different next year, either. I think I'm going to organize a pizza party in my house.