$400,000 to Toronto Gay Pride a stimulant too far
Wednesday, 24 June 2009

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, however, 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 Mardi Gras run amok. Public nudity is de rigueur at Toronto's 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.

(You can view a few pics from this year's festival by clicking here. BE ADVISED! These pics may be offensive to some people.)

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.

A few months ago the Prime Minister himself gave a keynote address to grassroots conservatives attending a major conference in Ottawa in which he extolled the importance of faith, family and community to the country in general and his government in particular. One wonders how he can reconcile those words with the decision of his Secretary of State for Small Business and Tourism to authorize this grant. After all, there isn’t much faith, family or community in evidence in the weeklong event – unless you count Toronto’s BDSM community that is. (For those of you who don’t know what BDSM stands for – trust me, you probably don’t really want to.)

Even from a purely electoral point of view, the grant makes no sense. It’s been said that the only things certain in life are death and taxes. I’m pretty confident that you can add to that list that fact that nobody – I repeat, nobody – will vote conservative simply because the Harper government suddenly decided to celebrate and promote a radical version of gay “culture”. On the contrary, if anything the conservatives will lose votes, and not just amongst social conservatives either. Fiscal conservatives, already unnerved by the growing debt and ballooning deficit, are sure to be turned off by this grant as well, especially since it is being justified, in part, as part of the government’s economic stimulus package.

But it is among social conservatives that the government risks hemorrhaging its most critical support. These are mainly sensible, middle-class Canadians who agree with Pierre Trudeau’s observation that the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation, but who also believe – not unreasonably – that what goes on in the bedrooms of the nation has no business playing a central role in the affairs of state. This is the backbone of the Conservative Party, not the naked marchers of Toronto’s Gay Pride Parade who take particular pleasure in displaying their genital piercings, or their spectators who revel in the display.

How the Harper Conservatives think they can secure a majority in the near future – or ever – without their support mystifies me. Yet they seem to be intent on trying. From income splitting to protecting unborn victims of crime, this government has ignored, obstructed or jettisoned virtually every prudent policy initiative that social conservatives have championed, all the while bending over backwards to appease its political and ideological opponents. It reminds me of something Margret Thatcher once wrote about Ted Heath, her predecessor as leader of Britain’s Conservative Party: “He was always talking about reaching out to win over the support of people from other parties, but he had no willingness to listen to the Conservative Party.”

Under Thatcher’s leadership it should be noted, conservatives formed three successive majority governments in Great Britain.

Now more than ever, Canada needs sensible conservative government; unfortunately we’re not getting it from the Conservative Party. Instead what we’re getting is a patchwork of confused and often contradictory policies aimed at preserving power for its own sake rather than as a means for putting the country on the right track. The time has come, therefore, for rank and file members of the party to let their leaders and elected representatives know that they’re mad as hell and they’re not going to take it any more.

An additional $400,000 in federal debt to fund Toronto’s Gay Pride Week is just a stimulant too far.

Comments (41)add comment
Steve: ...
Couldn't agree more, although you're sure to be accused of being anti-gay. Do I smell a human rights complaint? LOL
1

June 24, 2009
TUO (the unimportant one): ...
In Jean Cretien's days, a Minister of Human Rresources dished out grants without follow-up action to check results. Now, the Conservative Government takes the same blunder. While it holds the purse string, it should lay down criteria for releasing it. I am all for spending money to promote tourism, but doing it by advertising sex trades or organizing sex parades is just downgrading Canada's status as a country. The $400,000 is unwisely spent.

By the way, I think that churches should do something to starve gay parades. When they come to know that such events are near, can't they tell church goers that taking part in, even watching, these events will be downgrading their status as Christians?
2

June 24, 2009
Dave: ...
I predict that Conservative supporters will take their cue from those of Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock. They will sit on their hands. Sometimes a cure requires surgery.
3

June 24, 2009
Martin Whitbread: ...
Perhaps the time has come to unseat this party from Government. They're certainly not getting any more of my money, and I need somebody else to vote for. What shall we do?
4

June 24, 2009
George: ...
sad to say that for twice that amountie given to the albeit perhaps greedy Quebec Arts Community Harper would have won a majority and could therefore ignore trying to curry favour from the gay crowd.
5

June 24, 2009
Hayward : ...
always like your article as a consevative and especially a christian,i don,t like tax payer money wasted on such wasted causes such as promoting and supporting worldly causes
6

June 24, 2009
Andrew Ketel: ...
I voted for the Harper Conservatives hoping and believing for a conservative government which would govern on principle. But we have seen since with the last election that this government is attempting to stay in government even if it costs them their political soul. The Harper government is no more conservative than the last liberal government. This $400,000 grant to support the pride parade is another example of its nonconservative agenda. This is an area that government does not belong and should not be supporting with the tax payers purse. Disappointment does not even begin to describe what I feel about the Conservatives, I am a party member who will have trouble to vote for them again.
7

June 24, 2009
Chris Fraser: ...
I am extremely disappointed that the Conservative government has decided to spit in the face of many conservatives like myself who trusted the party to stand up for traditional Canadian family values. I sadly predict another right wing split in the not too distant future. O Canada, where are we headed?

Chris Fraser
8

June 24, 2009
Hermina Dykxhhorn: ...
Has it come to this? Are Conservative MP's so Ottawashed that they are incapable of recognizing that this attempt to curry favour in the homosexual community by pandering to its basest element would erode the CPC's core support?

Canadians, regardless of their orientation, don't need a faux "cultural" event, an event which is, in fact, destructive of culture. Subsidizing it with our tax money makes all Canadians complicit in its debauchery. Besides, homosexuals are statistically among the richest Canadians and, along with their growing corporate sponsor base, can well afford to pony up the cash this debacle needs to continue without milking your and my taxes.

Perhaps the party brass is counting on the fact that this will be forgotten by the Fall and that we'll all carry on supporting the CPC. Anything is possible of course, but I suspect that, after numerous small and large humiliations, many have reached the tipping point. The checks will no longer be in the mail. The phone banks will be unmanned and they won't be pounding signs in the ground anytime soon.

Those responsible ought to be ashamed of themselves for having so little regard for truth and beauty and for the natural law given to us by our Creator, as well as for insulting thousands of supporters they well knew would be hurt by this move. It begs the question whether there are any mature adults left among our MP's? Who spearheaded this initiative and was it approved by the Prime Minister and caucus?

Hermina

9

June 24, 2009
John Schmitt: ...
I totally agree with you and with all those who have responded above. I recently sent a brief message to my Conservative MP suggesting that they stop trying to find ways to stay in power and JUST DO THE RIGHT THING. If even the Conservatives are becoming Liberals, what hope is there for the country? Maybe the next best choice for real conservatives will become the Family Coalition Party if the present Conservatives can't get their act together.
10

June 24, 2009
Don Jones: ...
I voted for the Family Coalition Party last time just because the Conservatives are walking away from principles our country was built on. It is sad. I'm praying for our nation.
11

June 24, 2009
Ian W Craig: ...
While, in Ottawa terms, the 400k is not a significant amount of money, the decision to abandon their core consituency will cost the Federal Conservatives next vote. After years of unprincipled (I don;t mean bad, per se, only unprincipled - meaning doing whatever gets the obvious votes) under Cretien/Martin a lot of us hoped Harper and Co. would rise above such tripe and let the principles for which their convervative/reform roots stand/ This slip will cost them many votes across Canada, and they still won't win a single Toronto seat. So where's the gain? Only pain.
12

June 24, 2009
John Mason: ...
I think everyone who reads this should vote for the Family Coalition Party. They are the true party of people who read this blog. They represent the constiuency of this blog. I don't understand why this writer should run for the leadership. The FCP needs his leadership.
13

June 24, 2009
Abu Nudnik: ...
Mr Ben-Ami: You write: "...that the state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation, but who also believe – not unreasonably – that what goes on in the bedrooms of the nation has no business playing a central role in the affairs of state."

I'll say! The two are corollaries: quid pro quo is the bedrock of law. Without it life would be nothing but a struggle for power: bending the lives of others under the will of whoever can amass the most of it.

The erasure of the line between public and private has gone the other way too. A couple of years ago City of Toronto's employees waltzed onto my property without a warrant and installed child-guard governors on all my windows so they can't be opened more than two inches in the summer. Within two hours I walked round the building and counted 22 out of 32 suites where the owners had already removed them.

Yet people claim rights to every kind of behaviour in public as freedom of expression while simultaneously claiming privacy rights in public. They can do what they will in public but I can't, say, take a picture of them doing it lest I invade their "privacy." Rights for me, not for thee. I call this world "The perversphere," pronounced without the 2nd "r."

This sickness is a disease effecting the entire culture.
14

June 24, 2009
Aeriol Alderking: ...
This is going the way of Mulroney....what you resist, persists. Where is the Reform Party?
15

June 24, 2009
Brian Rushfeldt: ...
The opposition to funding of the Toronto sex parade is not about being anti homosexual as much as being anti indecency. The sex perverts marching naked in the streets could be hetero or homo - does it matter? The government paying people to celebrate naked in the street is sick.

The progressives of the Con-servative party must have full control now.
16

June 24, 2009
Dawn Stefanowicz: ...
Hi Joseph,

Thank you for this written article. It will be posted to http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org under Resources>Professional>Cultural Influences tonight.
17

June 24, 2009
Jim Christian: ...
You speak of a "grassroots revolt" - well, it has indeed begun.. or rather, it has accellerated. I called the CPC (866)808-8407 number and cancelled my party membership. This has been brewing really for a long time, but this was the straw that broke the political camel's back. For a long time I had hoped that the CPC might become a home for Canadians who value life and family issues. The party threw us a few scraps of encouragement once in a while, but always with a wink and a nod. In all reality, folks, we've been played. Time to wise up. Time to smell the coffee, and realize that the "progressive" parasite has taken firm control of the now rotting carcass that used to be a "conservative" party. So long, good riddance.

There are some very good and strong MPs still in the CPC - I hope that now they will see that they must increasingly compromise their beliefs to remain there.
18

June 24, 2009
Kevin: ...
"Don Jones: ...
I voted for the Family Coalition Party last time..."

Ummm... I thought the FCP was a provincial party and not a federal party?
19

June 24, 2009
Lloyd Makaroff: ...
We too were disappointed to hear the funding of the so called pride parade. It makes me want to weep for our country.
20

June 24, 2009
Kevin McDonald: ...
Don't get scandalized (i.e. angry) by scandalous events wrote St. John of the Cross, a Sixteenth century mystic and doctor of the church.

That is we must be logical and dispassionate, even when faced with a government that also gave 40k over three years to "The International Day to End Homophobia"

If you want to change things you will need a strong, national party. The Christian Heritage Party is tiny and a theocracy that does not appeal to non-Christians and especially non-Protestants. It needs to change the basis of its policies from the Bible to secular arguments and language to succeed but only a few in that party recognize that.

The pro-family parties are too regionally based and there are more social conservatives in the CPC who could still possibly ditch Harper someday and get someone in who at least allow interparty debate.

If Harper does not win a majority in the next election we will turf him. So if you leave now you won't have any say in that.

Those leaving the Conservative Party over this outrage are basing their decision on emotion, not logic. More important issues like abortion can't even be debated by parties with no seats and little prospect of any.
21

June 24, 2009
Jim: ...
So what's the big deal? the gay pride parade earns over a billion in revenue for the city of Toronto for tourism. If people are going to criticize government spending, criticize it fairly across the board. Don't jump on the gays, just because you don't approve of them or their parades.
22

June 24, 2009
Peg Byars: ...
Rather than damn the man in power, how be we get on our knees and turn the tide in the heavenlies as we are called to do in Ephesians 3:10. Pray and intercede for Mr. Harper to have the courage to make decisions that will please God, not man, and to keep his promises to the people who elected this party into power. This is our watch, saints - we are accountable to God for praying for this leader.
23

June 24, 2009
Steve: ...
I agree with Kevin. The answer is not to form a new party, nor is it to migrrate to another. The answer is to remain and work within the CPC.

I happen to live in southern Ontario and have been following the provincial PC leadership race closely. Heavy weight conservatives like Joseph and Tristan Emmanuel (who is no longer with the ECP Centre) have played a central role in shaping candidate Randy Hillier's policy platform, helping him to become by far the most compelling, the most exciting of all those vying for the position. They have succeeded in bringing libertarians, fiscal and social conservatives under one banner with the simple message that Ontarians want a principled conservative party with the courage to state and defend its principles when in opposition, and the integrity to govern by them when elected. Hillier's campaign has shaken the moribund Tory establishment to its foundations and has transformed the leadership race from a competition of personalities to one of ideas and policies.

Here's an example. One of Hillier's policy proposals is to eleminate Ontario's abusive Human Rights Commission and transfer cases of authentic discrimination into the real court system. This single proposal electrified the conservative base and forced every other candidate to adopt a similar position or risk being left in the dust. The result? Whoever wins the leadership, the PC Party of Ontario will soon be the first major political party in Canada with a serious plan to overhaul the hated system.

The point of all this is - don't quit the party. Sure, withhold your donations as a sign of protest, but remain a member, and when the time comes, role up your sleeves and fight for your principles. If we do this instead of jumping ship, we will win.

One final note.

Joseph heads up an organization called the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies (www.policystudies.ca) with some of the smartest conservative policy experts and strategists in the country. Not fake conservatives, but the real deal. Check out their website and if you want to make a difference, get in touch with them, put together an event, and have someone come out and speak, especially Joseph, who I've heard and seen twice now.

Get organized, get active. If you do, we will all win.
24

June 24, 2009
Stirling: ...
This announcement was the final straw for me. I resigned my position with my local Conservative EDA on Tuesday evening. After 14 years of having my principles betrayed by successive 'conservative' parties, I'm out. At some point there has to be a payoff for the investment of time and money, and the never-ending compromising, At some point the government has to do SOMETHING conservative to make it all worthwhile. Clearly that 'something' is not coming under the leadership of Stephen Harper. Until now I could rationalize every unconservative move as a political calculation designed to win a majority. This $400,000 expenditure will not in anyway move us towards majority government and its immoral to boot.

Conservative-minded values would now be better served brining this government down than perpetuating it.

Conservative politicians need to learn the hard way (AGAIN!) that they need to act like conservatives when elected.
25

June 24, 2009
rene : ...
Somehow, I always thought Harper was a Christian.
Apparently he rather leans on satan than God.
Christians better start praying for him and
stop the financial flow.
26

June 25, 2009
James Black: ...
I agree with you, homosexuality is about lewdness etc. for details see William D. Gairdner's book entitled "Attack on the Family". As for the grant to the Toronto homosexuals days I see it as proof that the Prime Minister does not micro-manage his ministers notwithstanding the grant was morallly wrong to do. Beleive me when I say that I am on side but I would suggest the use of a more accurate and descriptive term. So I would suggest "homosexual" rather than the word they use themselves ,"Gay", an attempt too sanitize immoral behaviour. In the New Testament we are warned of Lucifer describing this angel of light as, "He was a liar from the beginning and when he speaks he speaks his native language"- ie Gay, Homophobic & redefining marriage , family etc.. I am in no way suggesting that you are just to explain why I can not use terms invented or redefined by homosexuals. As for comments to the effect that Mr. Harper should be doing more see William D. Gairdner's book entitled, "OH, OH Canada" it should help anyone who has questions as to the why of what Prime Minister is doing. I have a better understanding of our Prime Minister and what he is trying to do. I can see his various legislation to strenthen the family unit in Canada. That is why as a Christian/Social Conservative I have no problem in supporting Mr. Harper as our Prime Minister.
27

June 25, 2009
Ellen Nightingale: ...
I am a contributing Conservative- I am not rich, but, I give what I can. I have believed in the policies of the Conservative Party. I have believed them to be family oriented, and standing on the foundations upon which this country was built. In no way will I support a party that contributes to the Gay movement.The Celebrities, and people in positions of power have all painted an attractive picture of Gays, which has torn asunder the traditional family picture. I know that God will judge not only the Homosexual, but ALL those who have encouraged and enhanced their rise to their ever increasing place in society. God tells us we are to love the sinner but hate the sin. So be it.
28

June 25, 2009
Dorothea Mawhinney: ...
I can't help but recall the tragic death by suicide of an Ontario woman, in recent memory, who had been cut off her welfare benefits and forced to endure house arrest. She had been tried and convicted of allegedly cheating on the system, at a time when she was actually pregnant. She died of an overdoes, killing her unborn child as well as herself. I think that should be considered second degree murder! Everybody knows that nobody can exist on the monthly income provided by Social Services. Why don't we beef up assistance to the poor, instead of throwing it away on people who don't need it? Thank you.
29

June 25, 2009
Kevin McDonald: ...
Pro-homosexualist charlatan Stephen Harper notwithstanding, the best place to change our horrendous abortion-anytime regime is within the Conservative Party of Canada.

Don't be sidetracked by smaller issues. Abortion is the paramount issue in Canadian politics today. I think the Canadian Protestant Heritage Party (a more accurate name) got a grand total of 26,000 votes in the last federal election.

And that's down from over 100,000 at its inception. It has many good policies but we are all not Bible-thumping protestants dear CHP.

I hope you are reading this Jim Hnatiuk. You are a good man but you face an impossible task unless the party platform is put in language we can all rally behind.
30

June 25, 2009
Jim Hnatiuk: ...
I’d like to shed some light with respect to the CHP and the mis-information that was shared by Mr. Kevin MacDonald.
When the CHP was formed in 1986 in British Columbia, both Roman Catholics and Protestants sat around the table together. These couples are still with us, I contacted Ed Vanwoudenburg who was one of the founders and the first leader of the CHP and I asked him for his comments. He wrote back: “When the founders were in the development process of our constitution and unalterable principles we consulted extensively with RC theologians. The Bishop of Vancouver went so far as to assign a priest to meet with us and help formulate the principles. In the end the RCs had no problems with it”

The spirit of the CHP principles was to insure equal participation. I can only ask that people look at this from the prospective of joining a political party not a church.

It’s only a few Roman Catholics that have expressed to me a concern as to the wording of our second principle on the ‘final authority’. I as a Baptist similarly don’t believe that the bible is self interpreting; the great number of different protestant denominations is evidence of that. Unfortunately man’s interpretation has been a major cause of division. I see the bible as the ‘final authority’ in that ‘the Book of Mormons’ is not a final authority, even though Mormons consider themselves Christian they give the Book of Mormons equal weight to the Bible. Nor is the Koran an authority etc. This is the authority that is being referred to; our CHP principle is not suggesting that it doesn’t have to be interpreted by the church.

Today, many Catholics are CHP members and Catholics have run as candidates for the CHP. Two former Leaders of the CHP were Roman Catholic namely: Charles Cavilla and Heather Stilwell. A few years ago I served on the CHP National Board with National Secretary Margaret Purcell who is Roman Catholic. So I’m thinking it could be more Kevin’s reluctance to leave the CPC behind (and his one issue) and stand with those Christians who are very visible in the public square. (Who have a full slate of policies). Kevin, and most all Christians will attest that our CHP policies on both life and marriage are solid and the best in the nation.

I’d like to give you one recent example of why the CHP Catholic & Protestant founders could foresee the need for unalterable principles:
In April of this year, at their request, four Muslim leaders out of Toronto asked to meet with a delegation of leaders from the CHP. We agreed because the CHP will ‘speak to all but be shackled to none’, as a federal party we must be open to hear from everyone. At the meeting they expressed that they were very unhappy with the secularization of the existing parties in Ottawa and were hoping to find a way that they could be involved as members of the CHP.
They asked if it was possible for us to change our party principles – namely the first one because they believe that Jesus was a prophet, they were apparently ok with everything else.
We shared that our principles are unalterable and that Jesus Christ is Lord. The meeting was friendly and at the end of the day they expressed that they still may decide to support us.
This more demonstrates the reasoning behind establishing ‘unalterable’ principles.

Our CHP Denominational Protocol was approved at our last National Board meeting in Manitoba and is available if you contact our This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it

Orphaned as a child, I was brought up in a Catholic home and my high school years were completed at St Josephs College (boy school) in Otterburne Manitoba, there I was taught by Oblate Priest and Brothers. Through no fault of any church, my life’s journey of faith and having had three mothers and three fathers had me participate in also the United & Presbyterian churches. I hold Roman Catholics in high regard and in many respects owe them for much of my Christian upbringing.

Because of my diverse life experiences, I honestly see the value and the good of the people in many Christian denominations. And I in turn believe you are a good man Kevin, our CHP policies are currently being re-written into what our constituents will understand. As they are completed they are being added to our web www.chp.ca under “Better Solutions’. We need good men and women “IN” the party to fine tune how we present ourselves as we move ahead.

To this end, Canada is in terrible shape morally, an Angus reed poll showed that half the Christians in Canada no longer vote. I believe it is paramount that our Christian voices are united politically. Margaret Purcell often said that without the Catholics on board, we will not elect members to parliament, I agree with her and so do the many Catholics that currently belong to our party.

Jim Hnatiuk
CHP National Leader
31

June 26, 2009
Anne Smyth: ...
I have been reading the comments with great interest and I am also disappointed with the latest poor decision of Harper's. I like Harper but I think he is misguided and feels he has to make concessions to self interest groups because of the existing minority government.I am at a point where it is difficult to discern a leader who says what he means and means what he says. Just look at some of our previous Prime Ministers; I am a practicing Catholic and, I hate to have to say it but, from my perspective, the worst Prime Ministers have been those who call themselves "Catholic" if you think about it, right back to Trudeau. Once they get into office they seem to abandon their principles because they are so afraid of being accused of forcing their views on others forgetting that what made this country great is the Judeo-Christian foundation by our forefathers. Even Premier McGuinty professes to be "Catholic", still, he visited a Catholic school and actually told the students he supported abortion. I realize these are all Liberals but now we have a Conservative Prime Minister who is a Christian and it appears he feels he has to compromise his principles by agreeing to donate thousands of dollars to a homosexual movement which doesn't need the money. They have enormous financial support from Corporations and all manner of agencies who do so fearing being labelled "homophobic". How is it our leaders are so out of touch that they don't realize the self interest groups they are afraid of are noisier but never the less, in the minority? The silent majority are God fearing believers waiting for someone with a backbone instead of a wishbone to lead our country back to sanity. We need to stop being silent and shout (as in the movie Network) I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!
32

June 28, 2009
maz2: ...

$400,000 to Pride

June 29th, 2009 by Joanne

Stimulate this!

(NSFW - Only for family festivals)
33

June 29, 2009
maz2: ...
Ooops: link for above here:

http://www.bluelikeyou.com/2009/06/29/400000-to-pride/#comments
34

June 29, 2009
Ted Clarke: ...
Please do not confuse your anti-gay philosophy with the Christian Faith. You exhibit all the traits of the Nazis and other hate mongering peoples. If you knew anything about Christianity you would know that Christ embraced ALL people - and he never never never encouraged hate for anyone. It just shows how little you really know about the Christian faith.
35

June 29, 2009
Joseph replies: ...
Ted,

I don't know what you do for a living, but whatever it is, I hope it doesn't involve anything dangerous to you or others since you don't seem interested in paying even the slightest bit of attention to what you're doing (or reading).

First, the column deals with misuse of taxpayers' dollars, not with being gay. I make no criticism whatsoever of gays in the piece.

Second, I make no mention whatsoever of anything Christian in the column. There's a good reason for this. I'm not Christian, I'm Jewish - which makes your Nazi comment particularly inappropriate.

A lot of people commenting on the column injected the issue of Christianity into the debate, but not me. Those who know me know how much I personally respect Christians and their religion for all the good they do, but I think that they are wrong to make theology a central political issue. I could never support or join the CHP for instance, even though I agree with almost every policy they advocate. The reason - I cannot embrace the Christian (and official CHP) view of Jesus as the son of God or even the Messiah without abandoning my own theological views and I suspect that I'm not alone in this. In fact, the centrality of theology to the CHP as opposed to the practical application of that theology in human/policy terms is the single greatest impediment to the party's growth and influence.

Which brings me to the following point:

Those who, like me, think that the Conservative Party as veered off course in recent months and years should resist the temptation to "tear up" their party cards and either walk away or join another party. Yes, protest. Evem withhold donations as someone else suggested above. But quit?

No! No! No!

This is no time to leave the party - it's time to re-exert our influence by renewing lapsed memberships and getting involved. There are a number of initiatives that are either happening or are about to be launched that will give true conservatives an opportunity to effectively advance the cause of conservatism both within the party and in the public square. I will be writing about these in the comming weeks and urge my friends and readers to check back here frequently and spread the word.

In the meantime - stay engaged where it can count the most. The Conseervative Party is our party. Let's keep it that way.


JBA
36

June 30, 2009
Kevin McDonald: ...
I'd like to point out the following to Jim Hnatiuk who is a courageous leader on an ever sinking ship.

1. Why wouldn't a bishop send a priest to the inception of the CHP? He would want to steer it towards a more Catholic-friendly platform. Obviously the priest and the bishop failed.

2. CHP is clearly run on protestant principles and says that all its policies are founded in the Bible. Protestants use the sola scriptura fallacy that leads them to believe that the Bible is a Christian's sole source of authority. Catholics hold to Scripture and Tradition as the basis of the Holy and ordinary magisterium. Whether that bishop or that priest wanted to see a political party that was pro-life grow is not relevant: As CHP is now, neither could join in good conscience, and all those big-hearted, but ill-catechized Catholics who have joined it now are in error.

3. Yes pseudo-Catholic politicians have done much damage to Candada as our faux-evangelical Prime minister does now. Bringing them up in this argument is a red herring.

4. Jim wrote: "It’s only a few Roman Catholics that have expressed to me a concern as to the wording of our second principle on the ‘final authority’.

Well, Jim the Holy See would also agree that the Bible is not the final authority. From before and after the protestant schism. Again, whether the bishop and priest were hoping to steer the CHP away from that principle is probably the key issue here. They obviously failed, and that was almost forgone given the number of protestants in the party -- they would overwhelm anyone hoping to get the Bible clause dropped.

5. It is a political party that you have "churched". You have never addressed mine and others principle argument: why can't you just rewrite everything in secular language, all the good pro-life,pro-family tenets, etc.? Too many Orangeman ruin the broth. This is most likely what the priest and bishop hoped to subtly steer you away from but would never admit now as it is a pastoral issue: you are separated brethren.

6. It does not matter what you believe about the Bible Jim. The CHP's position is clear that it is authoritative for all Christians.

7. Your principle that neither churches nor the CHP will interpret the Bible does not work practically. Which translation? What does that verse really say about homologous transfer of zygotes, cloning, xenotransplantation and other issues the Bible never addressed?

8. Yes some Catholics are CHP members but they should not be. They are poorly catechized. I also know Catholics who favour abortion. Your point is moot. They should know their faith better.

9. Yes your policies on life and marriage are "excellent" as you claim but you are a theocracy essentially: a closed camp to non-Christians. All of your principles can be rewritten in secular terms, but this is the achilles heel of protestants: all that scripture and little or no philosophical training

9. Your meeting with the Muslims demonstrates my point. They are on to what I and others want: a pro-life party that does not bring up Allah, Jesus, Budda or Yahweh. All politics, no religion. You dropped the ball on that one. Even if they support you unofficially, you could have had much larger support and helped assimilate Muslims into Canadian society. Does CHP inflexibility know no bounds?

10. Your belief that Jesus in Lord and Messiah had no place in a room with Muslims who only wanted to make common ground and advance good public policy. Heretical Christianity meeting the other Abrahamic Judeo/Christian heresy. No wonder it did not mesh and cooperate. The Devil would want you both to not join hands.

11. You should not even have a denominational protocal at all. Ever!!! That is just nuts. Do you wear religious pajamas to bed?

12. You are clearly proto-Catholic. It is time to come home. It is time to make a political party that lets all religions feel at home. Yours is a small and mean Christianity. Mine is a big tent, a universal one that does not feel threatened creating policy with Muslims.

13. You went from a paltry 100,000 plus federal votes at your inception to a infinitisimal 26,000 at the last election. CHP needs to become the "Canadian Heritage Party" -- many good Jews, Muslims, aboriginals, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Catholics and others of diverse faith communities made Canada's great heritage, not just those Orangemen who think the Bible is their authority and their pastor their mini-pope.

14. Margaret Purcell must be some sort of hopeless idealist. Catholics have seen this party for years and not joined. You are kidding yourself if the few there represent the mainstream, faithful Catholics. You only got those in the front lines of the abortion trenches who got fed up and made a bad choice. They should form a Catholic caucus within the CHP immediately and demand rewriting the bibliolatrous platform.

Kevin G. McDonald
Pro-life, Pro-family Christian sick and tired of CHP nonsensical windmill tilting


37

June 30, 2009
Kevin McDonald: ...
Below is exactly what I am talking about and why others long before me derided the CHP as a "theocracy". None of this even has to be in the party's literature, even if around 95% believe it.

Its just crazy. The party can declare itself officially pro-life/pro-family. There is no need to bring their concept of God and religion and a Christian's authority into it.

As a Polish priest I once worked for used to say: "Baah, is useless, is like finger up nose".

CHP is just shooting itself in the foot for no good reason. A whole bunch of self-important mini-popes putting their religious beliefs ahead of saving Canada.

Well go to hell CHP if you can't see the obvious.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~`

Biblical Principles that Guide the Christian Heritage Party of Canada
Party principles are based on these Biblical ethics and are unalterable:

We Believe:
There is one Creator God, eternally existent in three Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. We believe in the Lordship of Jesus Christ.


The Holy Bible to be the inspired, inerrant written Word of God and the final authority above all man's laws and government.


Civil government to be under the authority of God.


The purpose of civil government is to ensure freedom and justice for a nation's citizens by upholding law and order in accordance with Biblical principles.


Decision-making processes by civil government must not in any way contravene these Biblical ethics
38

June 30, 2009
Peter: ...
"The purpose of civil government is to ensure freedom and justice for a nation's citizens by upholding law and order in accordance with Biblical principles."

Interesting. That's an almost word for word translation of one of the founding principles of the Islamic Repulic of Iran, if you substitute "teachings of the Prophet" for "Biblical principles".

Just what the world needs...another theocracy.

39

June 30, 2009
Robert scrymgeour: ...
As a member of the P.C party of Canada this grant was not to my liking. The only reason such a grant could be allowed is only to encourage the windfall of tax dollars which such event as the Gay Pride would bring to Toronto. As a normal everyday Canadian I will make my point to My local M.P such a grant in the future must not be issued by a P.C Gov't. Why not put such a grant to work to bring a Boy Scout Jamboore to Toronto. Such an event bringing Scouts from around the world would bring in Millions to Toronto and Canada. Also would show the people of Toronto that kids of this world are of high standards not freaks that run up Yonge Street in the Nude or almost nude acting like Fools.
40

June 30, 2009
Kevin McDonald: ...
I noted Joseph Ben Ami's comment that CHP has good policies but he can't join it because he's a Jew.

Well I can't join it because I am Catholic: it is a protestant theocracy.

Why do they have to bring theology into a political party? Jim Hnatiuk is a good and principled man who wants the best for Canada, but if he can't convince the CHP to drop all religion and rename and rebrand itself it is just a waste of time and money.

Make it the "Canadian Heritage Party" and drop all reference to God, Jesus and religion from the platform. Be inclusive, not a protestant talking club for the mini-popes out there.
41

July 02, 2009

Write comment
Please note that you can no longer comment on this column after 30 days.

busy