503 organisations competed for a spot on this year's Stonewall Top 100 LGBT+ employers list (Envato Elements)

A Christian woman in British Columbia filed a human rights complaint because her city dared to fly a rainbow flag — but it backfired spectacularly.

Kari Simpson argued that a rainbow flag flown in the city of Langley showed “contempt and hatred for Christians” and was an affront to “any other religious group that does not accept the sex activists’ political agenda,” Burnaby Now reports.

In a complaint to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, Simpson said she is “often in the vicinity of the Langley City flag poles” and was disturbed to learn that the flag was being flown there for one week per year.

She retaliated by applying to have a flag she referred to as the “Canadian Christian Flag” flown on the National Day of Blessings.

But in his ruling, Paul Singh of the human rights tribunal noted that Simpson appears to have invented both the flag and the day herself.

“Ms Simpson does not dispute this,” he wrote.

Christian woman Kari Simpson once compared the rainbow flag to the Nazi flag.

When the city refused to recognise her fabricated religious holiday, Simpson complained she was being discriminated against.

Her fight began when the city passed a motion in 2016 that allowed the rainbow flag to be flown for a week during Vancouver Pride month each year.

Two years later, she wrote a letter to Langley City Council objecting to the flag’s presence in the city.

She claimed the flag is a symbol of a campaign that “panders to sex activism, bully tactics, child abuse, special rights for certain groups” and insisted the flag is “oppressive”. She said it is used to “direct hatred and contempt against anyone who dares challenge the LGBTQ2++ narrative”.

It identifies with political propaganda that is hostile and threatening towards other protected groups.

Furthermore, Simpson claimed that allowing the rainbow flag to fly in the city would force people who have been sexually assaulted by somebody of the same gender to “relive painful events”.

She went on to compare the rainbow to the Nazi flag, and called it “a symbol for a militant political movement”.

“It was created to declare power and victory and represents a political movement,” Simpson said at the time. “It identifies with political propaganda that is hostile and threatening towards other protected groups.”

The human rights tribunal rejected her claim and said the flag ‘promotes inclusivity’.

In his ruling, tribunal member Paul Singh rejected Simpson’s claim that flying the rainbow flag was discriminatory.

He said she was unable to provide any evidence that the rainbow flag had endangered her. Furthermore, he said the flag actually furthers anti-discrimination measures.

“The Rainbow Flag is a symbol of pride representing the diversity of LGBTQ+ communities and is a symbol to promote inclusivity and to address issues such as racial discrimination, cultural exclusions and other challenges faced by those in the LGBTQ+ communities,” he wrote.

He concluded by saying her complaint had no reasonable chance of succeeding and granted the city’s application to have it completely dismissed.