Peter Baklinski

,

Toronto school trustee called ‘homophobic’ for questioning nudity at ‘family friendly’ Pride parade

Peter Baklinski
Peter Baklinski

TORONTO, February 17, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Homosexual activists have slammed him as a ‘homophobic a**hole’ and an ‘outrageous bigot,’ but Toronto District School Board trustee Sam Sotiropoulos says that he’s just concerned about children viewing illegal public nudity at the city’s annual Pride parade.

Sotiropoulos created a firestorm on Twitter last week after he tweeted the Toronto Police force asking if it would enforce Canadian law against public nudity.

“As #TDSB participation raises questions of age-appropriateness, do you enforce Canada's public nudity laws at Pride?” he asked.

Sotiropoulos, who says he has nothing against “LGBTQ” people and says he would attend the Pride parade if invited, was immediately accused on twitter of insulting and hating gays and was labeled “homophobic.”

“Interesting to remark how readily those who don't want to be labelled cast labels and slander at others,” Sotiropoulos responded. “To think, these are the folks who are ‘inclusive’?! I'd say, ‘Shame on you,’ but there's no suggestion they'd understand what it is.”

Under Canada’s Criminal Code it is illegal to be nude in a “public place.” Section 174 states that a person who is “so clad as to offend against public decency or order” is “guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.”

Sotiropoulos says that city officials have a double standard when it comes to nudity at the Pride parade.

“If you were to parade naked in any of the number of parades — I don’t know how many throughout any part of the city that go on during the course of the year — I’m sure that you’d be post-haste dealt with by the police,” he said on the Tarek Fatah Radio Show Sunday morning.

Sotiropoulos said as a TDSB trustee, he has no problem with the board promoting the Pride parade. He agrees with the “very nature of the parade,” saying that the TDSB having a float in the parade is “part of our social justice piece.”

“We produce posters, send them out to schools, we send out flyers as well promoting the event as ‘family friendly,’” he said.

His main concern is that people parading naked in the Pride event “raises the question of age appropriateness.”

“Where’s the disclaimer?” he asked.

Sotiropoulos also does not like that students at the parade see Canadian law openly “flouted.”

Photos of the 2012 Toronto Pride parade (Warning: explicit) show completely nude men and women walking down the street.

Students are “seeing the breaking of the laws of Canada,” he said.

Sotiropoulos said that he does not understand “how being naked [in public] is part of being gay. I get stuck on that question. Why is that a necessary element to parade naked in the streets of Toronto to express what? I’m not sure, except for the flouting of the laws of this country.”

Jack Fonseca of Campaign Life Coalition told LifeSiteNews that public nudity, sadomasochism, and mock sex acts in the annual Pride parade are all part of the “edge-pushing” inherent to homosexual activism. Public nudity at the Pride parade just scratches the surface of what is normative for many within the gay lifestyle, he said.

“Within that lifestyle, especially as far as the men are concerned, one finds mind-blowing rates of promiscuity, multiple partners and anonymous sex, in comparison with heterosexual relationships,” he said.

Homosexual activist Patti Ettelbrick, former legal director for the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, once said that “being queer” is “more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. … Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex and sexuality, and in the process transforming the very fabric of society.”

Realizing that he had unwittingly stirred up a hornet’s nest with his original tweet, Sotiropoulos turned to Twitter to defend himself against his outspoken accusers.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

“One of the most divisive influences in Canada today is homosexism it’s disseminators are maliciously rabid,” he tweeted on Thursday, adding moments later: “We must fight ALL forms of discrimination if we're to be truly inclusive, that includes #homosexism as well.”

Toronto city councilor Shelley Carroll, a known supporter of the homosexual movement, tweeted back: “Dumbest Yet.”

Sotiropoulos was not impressed: “How dare she? How dare she? She just involved herself in my Tweet stream … and insults me out of the blue,” he told the National Post. He demanded an apology.

City councillor Gord Perks defended the nudity at Pride in a tweet, saying that the permit issued by the city allows for “expressions of sexuality.”

“I just want you to produce the ‘permit’ you claimed licenses folk to parade naked in public at Pride?” Sotiropoulos tweeted back.

Despite a flood of criticism, the trustee has received some support for his stance.

“Thank you for supporting families Sam. It's about time someone speaks up for the ordinary family!” tweeted Sébastien Bertrand.

Sotiropoulos has also seen humor in the situation, tweeting yesterday: “Brrr It's cold outside today. I bet there wouldn't be anyone parading naked in this weather! #TDSB floats or not.”

Toronto city officials are not the only ones to turn a blind eye to nudity in the Pride parade. Last year both Vancouver police and city officials announced they had no issues with public nudity at the city’s annual gay Pride parade, expressing no interest in upholding the law in this regard.

Sotiropoulos said his next step will be to put a motion to the board questioning the TDSB’s participation in the Pride parade if city officials will not uphold the country’s laws.

Contact info:

Sam Sotiropoulos, TDSB Trustee, Ward 20 Scarborough-Agincourt
Ph: 416-397-3066
sam.sotiropoulos@tdsb.on.ca

Toronto District School Board
5050 Yonge Street
Toronto, Ontario M2N 5N8
TTC: North York Centre Station
Ph: 416-397-3000
Email: GeneralInquiries@TDSB.on.ca

Toronto Police Service
40 College Street
Toronto, ON M5G 2J3
Ph: (416) 808-2222
Send email using this online form.

Rob Ford, Mayor of Toronto
Office of the Mayor
Toronto City Hall, 2nd Floor
100 Queen St. West
Toronto, ON M5H 2N2
Ph: (416) 397-3673
mayor_ford@toronto.ca


Advertisement
Featured Image
Hilary White Hilary White Follow Hilary

UK quietly opens the door to genetic engineering, ‘3-parent’ embryos

Hilary White Hilary White Follow Hilary
By Hilary White

Last month the UK’s Department of Health quietly redefined the term “genetic modification” to open the door to allow certain kinds of modification of human embryos – thus potentially making it the first country in the world to allow genetic engineering.

Scottish journalist Lori Anderson recently raised the alarm over the change in a column in the Scotsman, in which she alleged that the change is designed to “dupe” the British public into accepting “full-scale germline genetic engineering,” using human embryos as test subjects.

Anderson said that in July, the Department of Health “effectively re-wrote the definition of ‘genetic modification’ to specifically exclude the alteration of human mitochondrial genes or any other genetic material that exists outside the chromosomes in the nucleus of the cell.”

“The reason for doing this is that it believes it will be easier to sell such an advancement to the public if it can insist that the end result will not be a ‘GM baby’.”

This change follows a statement from the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), the government body that regulates experimental research on human embryos, approving the procedure to create an embryo from one couple’s gametes but with genetic material added from a third party donor, a procedure called in the press “three-parent embryos”.

Anderson quoted a statement from the Department of Health comparing this procedure to donating blood. The statement read, “There is no universally agreed definition of ‘genetic modification’ in humans – people who have organ transplants, blood donations, or even gene therapy are not generally regarded as being ‘genetically modified’. The Government has decided to adopt a working definition for the purpose of taking forward these regulations.”

This assertion was challenged by one of the UK’s leading fertility researchers, Lord Robert Winston, who told the Independent, “Of course mitochondrial transfer is genetic modification and this modification is handed down the generations. It is totally wrong to compare it with a blood transfusion.”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The HFEA, which throughout its history has been known as one of the world’s most permissive regulatory bodies, has been working steadily towards allowing genetically modified embryos to be implanted in women undergoing artificial procreation treatments. In a document issued to the government last year, they called the insertion of mitochondrial DNA (mDNA) into embryos “mitochondrial donation” or “mitochondrial replacement”. mDNA is the genetic material found in the cytoplasm outside a cell’s nucleus, problems with which can cause a host of currently incurable genetic illnesses.

In the statement issued in June, the HFEA said the technique of inserting “donated” mDNA into already existing in vitro embryos, “should be considered ‘not unsafe’ for the use on a ‘specific and defined group of patients.’”

“Mitochondria replacement (or mitochondrial donation) describes two medical techniques, currently being worked on by UK researchers, which could allow women to avoid passing on genetically inherited mitochondrial diseases to their children,” the statement said.

The HFEA admitted that the techniques are “at the cutting edge of both science and ethics” and said that the results of a “public consultation” in 2012/13 were being examined by the government, which is considering “draft regulations”.

In June, the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children echoed Lori Anderson’s concern, commenting that the HFEA is attempting to deceive the public. Paul Tully, SPUC’s general secretary, said, “Human gene manipulation is being sold to a gullible public on a promise of reducing suffering, the same old con-trick that the test-tube baby lobby has been using for decades.” 

Any manipulation of human genetics, always breaks “several important moral rules,” entailing the creation of “human guinea-pigs,” Tully said. “Human germ-line manipulation and cloning – changing the genetic inheritance of future generations - goes against internationally-agreed norms for ethical science.”

He quoted Professor Andy Greenfield, the chairman of the scientific review panel that approved the techniques, who said that there is no way of knowing what effect this would have on the children created until it is actually done.

“We have to subject children who have not consented and cannot consent to being test subjects,” Tully said.

Altering the mDNA of an embryo is what cloning scientists refer to as “germline” alteration, meaning that the changes will be carried on through the altered embryo’s own offspring, a longstanding goal of eugenicists.

In their 1999 book, “Human Molecular Genetics” Tom Strachan and Andrew Read warned that the use of mitochondrial alteration of embryos would cross serious ethical boundaries.

Having argued that germline therapy would be “pointless” from a therapeutic standpoint, the authors said, “There are serious concerns, therefore, that a hidden motive for germline gene therapy is to enable research to be done on germline manipulation with the ultimate aim of germline-based genetic enhancement.”

“The latter could result in positive eugenics programs, whereby planned genetic modification of the germline could involve artificial selection for genes that are thought to confer advantageous traits.”


Advertisement
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

,

Cable series portrays nun as back-alley abortionist

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson
Image
'To depict a nun who performs an abortion is a new low,' said Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

The Cinemax TV series The Knick portrayed a Roman Catholic nun as a back alley abortionist who tells a Catholic woman God will forgive her for going through with the procedure.

In its latest episode, which aired Friday night, the series showed Sister Harriet (an Irish nun played by Cara Seymour) telling a Catholic woman named Nora, “Your husband will know nothing of it. I promise.”

“Will God forgive me?” Nora asked, adding, “I don't want to go to Hell for killing a baby.”

“He knows that you suffered,” the sister replied, before performing the illegal abortion off-screen. “I believe the Lord's compassion will be yours.” 

The period medical drama is set at the Knickerbocker Hospital (“The Knick”) in New York City around the turn of the 20th century, when abortion was against both civil and ecclesiastical law.

“It is no secret that Hollywood is a big pro-abortion town, but to depict a nun who performs an abortion is a new low,” Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said. “The only saving grace in this episode is the real-life recognition of the woman who is about to have the abortion: she admits that her baby is going to be killed.”

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

The series is directed by Steven Soderbergh, known for such films as Erin Brockovich, the Oceans Eleven franchise, and Sex, Lies, and Videotape. More recently he directed The Girlfriend Experience, a film about prostitution starring pornographic actress Sasha Grey.

Critics have hailed his decision to include a black surgeon in circa 1900 America. But after last week's episode, the New York Times stated that The Knick has chosen to “demonstrate concern for other kinds of progress,” citing the depiction of the abortion. 


Advertisement
Balcony of the Grandmaster Palace - Valletta
Balcony of the Grandmaster Palace in Valletta, which houses the Maltese Parliament. Shutterstock
Hilary White Hilary White Follow Hilary

,

Catholic Malta enacts ‘transgender’ employment discrimination law

Hilary White Hilary White Follow Hilary
By Hilary White

An amendment to Malta’s Employment and Industrial Relations Act means that employment “discrimination” against “transsexuals” is now officially prohibited in the Catholic country. The provision, which was quietly passed in May, came into effect on August 12th.

The law allows those who believe they have a complaint to make a case with the National Commission for the Promotion of Equality, with an industrial tribunal or the courts. A government spokesman told local  media, “Employees do not need to prove that their employer has discriminated against them.”

“They only need to provide enough evidence pointing to a likely case of discrimination. The employer will then need to prove that discrimination has not taken place.”

The amendment defines illegal discrimination against “transgendered” people as, “in so far as the ground of sex is concerned, any less favourable treatment of a person who underwent or is undergoing gender reassignment, which, for the purpose of those regulations shall mean, where a person is considering or intends to undergo, or is undergoing, a process, or part of a process, for the purposes of reassigning the person’s sex by changing physiological or other attributes of sex.” 

Silvan Agius, Human Rights policy coordinator with the Ministry for Social Dialogue, Consumer Affairs and Civil Liberties, told Malta Today newspaper that the new amendment brings Maltese law into harmony with EU law.

“This amendment is continuing the government’s equality mainstreaming exercise. The inclusion of gender reassignment in the Act also brings it in line with the anti-discrimination articles found in both Malta’s Constitution and the Equality for Men and Woman Act,” Agius said.

Click "like" if you support TRADITIONAL marriage.

Agius is a key member of the homosexual activist apparatus in Malta’s government working to entrench the ideology of gender in law in Malta and elsewhere. In June, he was a featured speaker, with the notorious British anti-Catholic campaigner Peter Tatchell, at a Glasgow conference organised by the Edinburgh-based Equality Network, a group that helps organise and train homosexualist campaign groups.

The amendment to the law follows promises made recently by the country’s equalities minister, Helena Dalli, to a “transgender” congress in Hungary in May. Dalli, who brought forward Malta’s recently passed same-sex civil unions bill, told a meeting of gender activists in Budapest that while her government’s focus had been mainly on homosexuals, that she would shortly be turning her attention to “trans” people.

“The next step now is a Bill towards the enactment of a Gender Identity law. A draft bill has been prepared and it has now been passed to the LGBTI Consultative Council for its vetting and amendment as necessary,” Dalli said.

“Some of you may be thinking that we are moving forward quickly. I have a different perspective though. We are doing what is right, what should have been done a long time ago,” she added.

Since the legalisation of divorce in 2011, Malta has been remarkable for its rapid adoption of the gender ideology’s agenda. In 2013, Malta was named the “fastest climber” on the Rainbow Europe Index, a survey organised annually by ILGA Europe, the leading homosexualist lobby group funded directly by the European Union.

The ILGA Europe report notes (p. 114) that Helena Dalli Helena “was one of 11 EU Member States’ equality ministers to co-sign a call for the European Commission to work on a comprehensive EU policy for LGBT equality.” The report also noted that although the new Labour government has proved cooperative, the Christian Democrat Nationalist Party has “progressively proved more receptive to LGBTI issues, including same-sex unions.”


Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook