Stephen Harper government won�t fund Toronto gay pride festival
Yogi @ Wed May 12, 2010 11:44 am
QBall QBall:
The Caribana festival in Toronto also had federal funding denied after receiving it last year, but you don't see the black community having a massive hissy fit because of it.
You should hear all the whinning and snivelling going on in Edmonton over the 'festival funding' cuts!
PublicAnimalNo9 @ Wed May 12, 2010 11:57 am
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
$1:
Oh and I’m afraid I also think that some of the costumes and antics at Pride don’t really promote understanding, I believe they just reinforce stereo-types and provide fodder for the bigots.
no more so than Carnivale or Mardi Gras say that all heteros are drunks and sluts.
Exactly, just the ones that take part are drunks and sluts
BartSimpson @ Wed May 12, 2010 12:14 pm
KorbenDeck KorbenDeck:
Well then the gays can have some self pride and pay for the damn thing themselves
Bingo!
EyeBrock @ Wed May 12, 2010 12:47 pm
I think people have been surprised that most Canadians are agreeing with this funding cut.
DrCaleb @ Wed May 12, 2010 1:27 pm
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
I think people have been surprised that most Canadians are agreeing with this funding cut.
Imagine if the Government had been funding a "White Pride" fest.
MacDonaill @ Wed May 12, 2010 3:24 pm
I just don't think that events like these, nor their organisers and leaders, represent homosexuals well. The sad thing is that they try to, and have monopolised non-mainstream sexuality, particularly homosexuality, and defined it as an over-the-top, in your face, over the rainbow, fruitcake kind of lifestyle, when in fact all it should describe is sexual activity between members of one sex and conceivably the preference thereof.
These Chiquita banana ladies, these obnoxious girlymen, these aggressive bulldykes don't represent any of the homosexuals I have in my own family or any of those I have counted among my own friends. They do represent some I have chosen not to hang around because I generally don't like loud, obnoxious, flamboyant people, regardless of their sexual preference.
As for homosexuals not being 'seen', I'm not sure what they are supposed to look like other than ordinary, upright citizens. Why should I be able to pick the homo out of a crowd? If someone chooses to adopt the visually and audibly gay culture and to broadcast it to the world, that's his or her own business. But I don't have to approve of it, and I certainly shouldn't be forced to fund it.
All that being said, I am a radical partisan of personal freedom, and I not only support the right for these people to behave in that way, but I also literally think that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and that it is a perfectly natural behaviour.
Brenda @ Wed May 12, 2010 3:36 pm
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
I think people have been surprised that most Canadians are agreeing with this funding cut.
Imagine if the Government had been funding a "White Pride" fest.
WWIII anyone?
ShepherdsDog @ Wed May 12, 2010 6:01 pm
$1:
Now we also have far-left agitators such as the QAIA hijacking Pride for their own agenda(s).
I say the Canadian government funds their travel to the ME so that they can demonstrate their solidarity with the Arabs. The IDF should also refuse to rescue their sorry asses.
DrCaleb @ Thu May 13, 2010 10:51 am
Brenda Brenda:
DrCaleb DrCaleb:
EyeBrock EyeBrock:
I think people have been surprised that most Canadians are agreeing with this funding cut.
Imagine if the Government had been funding a "White Pride" fest.
WWIII anyone?
Doubtful, but the government should not fund one fringe group and not another. All, or none. My vote is none. If they want funding, do it the way everyone else funds their fun runs or walks for Gay Whales for Jesus . . . fund it themselves through volunteers or donations.