By Ron Gray Xtra’s article shows nude men in the ‘Gay’ Pride Parade. This has been happening for four or five years. The first time, the police arrested the naked men, but a homosexual Crown counsel in Toronto conspired to have the charges stayed, on the spurious grounds that they were “not naked” — they were wearing shoes! It’s this sort of sophistry that brings the law and Canada’s ‘justice’ system into disrepute. At the same time, a pro-life activist like Don Spratt — who went into Vancouver’s ‘Bubble Zone’ with tape over his mouth, to illustrate that the Supreme Court refused to defend his Section 2 Charter rights — gets put in jail for trying to be a voice for the most helpless among us. Shameful! Quite understandably, in subsequent years the Toronto police didn’t bother to arrest naked men in the shameful ‘Pride’ parade: why should they waste their time when Crown counsel will not pursue an open-and-shut case? Many Torontonians now take their children to see the parade; this is outright child abuse. Yes, the federal government is contributing to criminal actions. Why? because our supposedly “Christian” Prime Minister and high-profile “Christian” Minister of State lack the guts to say “No!” to bureaucrats and political advisors who tell them such acts of betrayal will gain public support. • The Prime Minister has made the Conservative government the defender of the abortion industry. • His government has introduced the most extravagant budget in Canadian history, adding to the burden that will have to be repaid by our children and grandchildren. (And the Liberals and NDP criticize them for not spending enough!) The men and women now sitting in the two chambers of Parliament apparently don’t understand that buying votes today with money that belongs to future generations is theft. • They are anti-life, anti-family, and anti-thrift and antinomian. If the Christians who stayed at home during the last election had gone to the ballot-box to vote for the CHP, we would have about 60 CHP Members of Parliament to call the government to account for this kind of criminal behaviour. So whose fault is it? It’s ours! We lack the conviction to “throw the rascals out”! Ron Gray is the past leader of the Christian Heritage Party. ...

The latest battle between an embittered, activist teacher and a faith-based educational institution in Alberta, a transgendered substitute teacher has filed a human rights complaint against the Greater St. Albert Catholic School Board. Janet Buterman, 39, claims she was dismissed by the school board because she was undergoing a sex change. The Catholic school board argues the procedure is in conflict with Catholic values. Buterman filed the complaint the same day Alberta formally includes sexual orientation into its provincial Human Rights Act. The complaint is just the latest attack against freedom of religious expression and conviction in the province – similar precedent-setting cases involve Red Deer pastor Stephen Boissoin’s current Court of Queen’s Bench appeal against the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal and chemistry instructor Delwin Vriend’s 1991 battle against King’s College over a dismissal regarding Vriend’s sexual orientation. The Vriend dispute led to a Supreme Court appeal, pitting Vriend against the province. The court ruled in Vriend’s favour, resulting in the province’s current Bill 44 efforts to enshrine sexual orientation into its provincial Human Rights Act. ...

There was a disgusting incident in Toronto last week. According to the National Post (Mar. 28), “city councillor Rob Ford was escorted out of his Toronto home in handcuffs and charged with domestic assault Wednesday.” He was charged with assaulting his wife and uttering death threats, charges that he is going to contest. What I honed in on in the National Post article was a line that said: “… even his critics reacted with sympathy to such a public spectacle. His lawyer went a step further, saying Mr. Ford’s humiliating arrest is the product of a flawed system … Dennis Morris placed the blame squarely on Ontario’s zero tolerance approach to domestic disputes, which compels police officers to lay charges whenever someone lodges a complaint of violence against his or her partner. ‘The police don’t have a choice,’ he said yesterday…. Critics… say the pendulum has swung so far that domestic disputes best dealt with in a family therapist’s office are clogging the courts. … ‘You often get people who have simple issues that need to be worked out, but now with the charge being laid, it may just add fuel to the fire,’ said Kerry UnRuh, a Winnipeg family law lawyer. ‘All of a sudden now you’ve got people litigating matters that have escalated as a result of the police getting involved.’” What UnRuh says is so elementary and obvious that only the intellectual squalor of feminazism could make people so blind as to not see it. Yet there are a sufficient number of femi-fascists – and those scared of them – to get laws passed that are rooted in that ideology, and those laws govern us today. But what really struck me was that it takes an incident involving a politician to draw attention to this tragic, family-rending situation in Ontario law. Do a Google search of “councillor Rob Ford” to see how much coverage this incident is getting. The fact is that dozens and probably hundreds of Ontario families are unnecessarily destroyed, invariably with the husbands/fathers facing the brunt of the machinery of the state, because of the current law on domestic violence. And nobody’s blanketing the airwaves and the internet with their stories. This is clear evidence of the entrenched reality of despotic fascism in Canada today; it reflects the inequality that exists between the governed and the governors. If a governor gets treated badly, it’s news, people notice, and perhaps a commitment is made to investigate the need for reforms. But if John Doe is the victim, then life – ho-hum – goes on. Enforcement of the principle of equality between the governed and the governors was the central issue for the Magna Carta, the foundational  document, one could argue, for Western democratic civilization. Without a commitment to equality between the governed and the governors, you have tyranny – despotism. It might at first appear as a benign despotism so that ignorant fools and lazy bums can be seduced into doing nothing to resist the evil. But despotism doesn’t remain benign for long. Ultimately, what we see here is the war between Secularism and Christianity. Secularism makes the state the central organizing principle for reality.  We could call it Messianic State-ism. An expression of that notion is the idea that crimes are ultimately offences against the state, not offences against the particular victim. Resolution of the problem, therefore, has to placate the state actors, not the victim. Another effect of this approach is that the state tries to make it easier to manage such problems by trying to make offences clear cut – “zero tolerance” – and by coming up with an approach that generalizes across populations rather than solutions that can be relatively easily tailored to particular circumstances. Here’s one comment included in the National Post article by someone with experience in domestic dispute case, making the case for a more flexible approach. “Robert Rotenberg, a Toronto lawyer who devotes 75% to 85% of his practice to domestic dispute cases, said his first reaction to Mr. Ford’s case was concern for his children, followed by a suspicion that there is more to the story of the couple’s troubles. ‘By arresting him,’ Mr. Rotenberg said, ‘it’s only going to make matters worse. Instead of he and his wife getting help, they’re getting divided.’” The Secularist approach to addressing domestic disputes is barbaric and abusive. It is an assault on human dignity. And it is a gross violation of Christian ethics which places far more confidence and authority in the family and family government than State-ism does. Tragically, usually due to a misplaced desire – sentimentality? – for the protection of women, even many Christians have bought into the idolatrous State-ist approach to dealing with domestic violence. If Ontarians insist on having one or two “zero tolerance” policies, I would suggest that one of them should be zero tolerance for feminazism. ...

June 24, 2009 By Joseph C. Ben-Ami Last week’s announcement of a $400,000 grant to Toronto’s Gay Pride Week is the latest indication of how detached the Harper Conservatives have become from their key supporters and how incoherent their evolving electoral strategy is as a result. That the government has not triggered a grassroots revolt by now is remarkable, a testament to the discipline of party members more than their loyalty. A few more announcements like this and it won’t be able to count on that either. Anyone who has attended Gay Pride Week knows that it has nothing whatsoever to do with being gay and everything to do with being as lewd and offensive as possible. It’s Marti Gras run amok. Public nudity is de rigueur at a gay pride parade, as are simulated sex acts of all kind, and some not so simulated. I’m not gay, but I suspect that such shockingly bawdy behaviour is embarrassing to many who are. But this isn’t about Gay Pride Week and its climactic parade through the streets of downtown Toronto – it’s about what the Harper Conservatives stand for… if anything. Go here to read the rest of the article. ...