Steve Jalsevac Steve Jalsevac Follow Steve

In 2011, I attended Toronto Pride, but I couldn’t stomach showing you what I saw, until now

Steve Jalsevac Steve Jalsevac Follow Steve
By Steve Jalsevac

WARNING: Some of the descriptions and photos included in this story, though censored, are nevertheless graphic. Viewer discretion strongly advised.

TORONTO, March 17, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – In 2011, I attended the Toronto Gay Pride Parade with the intention of taking photos on behalf of LifeSiteNews.

For many years I had resisted performing this particularly nauseating journalistic task, lest it spoil my annual wedding anniversary weekend. Still, in 2011, the parade date did not fall on the weekend of our July 1 anniversary date, and I realized that the deed finally had to be done.

Even so, since then I have avoided the disturbing task of going through and organizing all those photos and censoring the exposed genitals in many of the photos.

But our recent reports on Toronto, Canada’s hosting of the upcoming 2014 Homosexual “World Pride” Event and the province’s Catholic teachers’ announcement that they will march in the Pride parade, have prompted me to finally do something with the 116 usable photos I took of the 2011 Toronto parade.

Given the growing influence of the gay activist movement and the increasing number of these parades, we are all obliged to learn what goes on in them. The public needs better to understand the danger these events present to children and youths lured to participate in them. They also need to know how extensively many of our government-funded institutions are actively involved in this radical social change movement, without your permission and without you having voted to approve any of this.

Last September, LifeSiteNews published Patrick Craine’s slideshow and column about his attendance at the smaller Ottawa, Canada Pride parade. That woke up a lot of our readers. The Toronto parade that you will see in today’s slideshow is touted as supposedly the largest such parades in the world, although organizers and supportive mainstream media estimates of the size of the crowd are always impossibly inflated to way beyond the number of people that could possibly fit in the space available along the short parade route.

I caution that the photos are rather explicit, even though they have been edited to block out the more objectionable aspects. This slideshow reveals only some of what takes place during these so-called Pride weeks in various cities across North America. There is a lot more that happens, such as the Dyke March the day before, that would not be appropriate for LifeSiteNews to publish.

Upon arriving at the parade in 2011 I went to the end-point of the route and joined the crowd there anticipating the arrival of the first marchers. I could not help but notice that a shocking number of families had brought their children along to watch this debauchery.

Looking around, I strongly sensed that most Pride Parade watchers are not there to support whatever is being promoted in the parades. They were there for a sensational show - the more outrageous and kinky the better. You've heard of "bread and circuses"? There will always be a percentage of the population with poor moral judgement who will come out to watch any spectacle for sheer personal entertainment.

As the disturbingly dead-eyed transvestites approached throughout the parade, various women spectators became all giddy and dragged their husbands or boyfriends into standing for a photo beside each of the more outrageously attired and made-up transvestites (men dressed and made-up to look and act like women). That, I could not comprehend.

It was also disturbing to see many civil service branches, including all the various police forces and military branches, march in the parade in full uniform. They have now been co-opted into being enthusiastic supporters and protectors of the activities of individuals who for many years they used to treat or even arrest for dangerously unhealthy, public and often anonymous sexual activity that had been illegal.

I missed taking photos of the black-leather-clad, whip-holding, sado-masochist contingent in the parade.

Also missed near the very beginning, because I was so startled, was a photo of a young man in a bathing suit, in the back of a pickup truck leaning against the truck and jerking his hips as though he was engaged in homosexual intercourse with another man. It appeared that he had been doing this the entire length of the parade route. He was clearly exhausted from this at the end of the parade route.

A huge open tractor-trailer platform sponsored by the Toronto District School Board and filled with students and teachers, followed shortly afterwards. There were many teachers and students in the parade, including a large contingent of Catholic school students.

The Catholic students were undoubtedly, from my experience, encouraged or guided in most instances by certain of their teachers to reject the serious moral teachings of their faith. I doubt they had any idea that marching in the parade was a grave moral wrong and violation of the precepts of their faith. But then, in Ontario, very, very few teachers or even clergy have explained or preached Catholic teaching on homosexuality. It has been a seemingly forbidden subject, except for those who disagree with the Church on the issue.

For decades, there has been almost no effort by Catholic leaders to explain the love and charity of authentic Christian teaching on all sexual matters. So is it any wonder that some youth, missing strong parental guidance, would march in the Gay Pride parade?

Almost every float had strangely dressed and mostly undressed people making sexually provocative poses and movements.

The sado-masochist group was followed by a large contingent of totally nude men and women wearing only the legally required shoes and perhaps a little bit of leather here and there. One had to wonder what the lasting impression of all of this would be for the many children watching along the parade route. A bigger question perhaps, was what kind of parent would bring their children to this?

Immediately following the nude marchers was a contingent of VIPs, some openly declared homosexuals, and others who were not, all waving to the crowd and smiling as though this was just a nice country fair parade. They seemed to be having a grand time. One of them was the ever-so-tolerant, openly homosexual Ontario Liberal MPP and Cabinet Minister, Glen Murray. He stated in 2012 that Ontario Catholic schools will no longer be allowed to teach the Catechism’s doctrine that homosexual acts are “intrinsically disordered.”

These crass political opportunists who join the parade could care less that their participation might be a shame to their families and their parents and/or grandparents. For them it’s all about gaining new political allies and more power. And homosexual activists have proven to be very skillful political tacticians-for-hire, often having the talents and personal circumstances to work more intensely and for longer hours than most others with families. But no politicians who march in these parades, in my view, can be trusted to genuinely act on behalf of their constituents’ families, their community and their nation.

In 2011 - as in the years since then - much of the focus of the parade was the non-participation of the now-(in)famous Toronto Mayor, Rob Ford. 

Most LSN readers have probably heard a lot about Ford’s recent crazy antics. But in 2011, in his first year as mayor, Ford did his best to try to stop the city from spending several hundred thousand dollars of taxpayers’ money to fund the parade. Ford also proved to be the first Toronto mayor in a long time to refuse the mandatory mayoral participation, with squirt gun in hand, in the parade. He has gone to the cottage with his family for their usual holiday every year on that July 1st Canada Day long holiday weekend.

I knew what would happen to Ford for snubbing the annual gay extravaganza. He became the most hated mayor ever in Toronto’s history for not going along with the homosexual program. Nobody, no matter who they are, is allowed to get away with that, and so began a never-ending relentless and very personal persecution of the first mayor with the guts to stand up to what has proven to be a vicious gay mob. One has to wonder if this concerted backlash against Ford hasn't in some way contributed to his recent problems.

As you will see from the photos, there clearly was an unofficial theme for the parade that year. That theme was, “we hate Rob Ford”. The message also appeared to be, “Don’t mess with us, you politicians, or we will do everything that we can to destroy you.”

When the parade was finally over, thousands of people choked the carnival-like Church St, Toronto gay village. There were lots of food vendors, while the totally nude marchers from the parade sauntered or stood around eating an ice cream cone or whatever as though it was the most normal thing in the world. To me, they were sad and pitiful.

So now World Pride is coming to Toronto. A trip away that weekend is looking like a really good idea for my family.

FREE pro-life news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

Two Congressmen confirm: National 20-week ban on abortion will come up for a vote shortly

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 17, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A bill to end abortion in the United States after 20 weeks will move forward, and it will have the strong support of two leading pro-life Congressmen, the two Republicans told LifeSiteNews.com at the eighth annual Susan B. Anthony List Campaign for Life Summit on Thursday.

Rep. Chris Smith, R-NJ, told LifeSiteNews and the National Catholic Register that ongoing House discussions on H.R. 36, the "Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," will result in a pro-life bill moving forward.

"Very good language" is being put together, Smith told The Register. He told LifeSiteNews that he fully anticipated being able to support the final bill, because the House Republican caucus "wouldn't have something that would be unsupportable. Our leadership is genuinely pro-life."

In 2013, the "Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act" easily passed through the House of Representatives, only to be stalled by a Democratic-controlled Senate. This year, an identical bill was halted by Rep. Renee Ellmers, R-NC, and other Republicans -- surprising and angering pro-life leaders who thought its passage was assured. That bill, H.R. 36, is now being rewritten so it can be voted on by the full House, though its final wording remains uncertain.

Some fear that the House leadership will modify the bill to mollify Ellmers. She and others objected that the bill allows women to abort a child after 20 weeks in the case of rape – but only if they report that rape to the authorities.

Pro-life activists say removing the reporting requirement would take abortionists at their word that the women whose children they abort claimed to be raped. Congresswoman Ellmers has publicly stated the House leadership is considering such a proposal.

Jill Stanek, who was recently arrested on Capitol Hill as part of a protest to encourage Republicans to pass H.R. 36, said that would be "a loophole big enough for a Mack truck."

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Congressman Smith said the bill will come to the floor shortly. "The commitment to this bill is ironclad; we just have to work out some details," Smith said.

He also noted that, while a vote on the 20-week ban has been delayed for nearly three months, "we did get the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act passed, and that would have been in the queue now, so we just reversed" the order of the two bills.

Congressman Smith spoke to both outlets shortly after participating in a panel at the Summit.

Another speaker was Rep. Steve King, R-IA, who also supports the 20-week ban.

"I can't think of what” language that is actively under consideration could make him rethink his support for the bill, King said. He also told attendees that the nation was moving in a direction of supporting life.

The outspoken Congressman declined to answer further, noting "that's asking me to anticipate an unknown hypothetical."

The annual Campaign for Life Summit and its related gala drew other high-profile speakers, including presidential candidate Senator Rand Paul, potential presidential hopeful Senator Lindsay Graham, and Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus.  

Advertisement
Featured Image
"Someone who doesn’t flinch at the dismemberment of babies is not going to flinch at the dismemberment of some evangelical baker’s conscience."
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Pro-lifers are winning. So now they’re coming for our cupcakes?

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

As I travel across Canada (and at times the United States) speaking on abortion and various facets of the Culture of Death, one of the things I hear often is a hopelessness, a despair that the West is being flattened by the juggernaut of the Sexual Revolution. There is a feeling among many people that the restriction of religious liberty, the continued legality of abortion, and the redefinition of marriage are inevitable.

This is, of course, one of the most prominent and successful strategies of the Sexual Revolutionaries—create an aura of inevitability while concurrently demonizing all those who oppose their new and mangled “progress” as Neanderthals on the cusp of being left behind by History. That inevitability becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, because many people don’t realize that the various battles in the Sexual Revolution actually all correlate to one another—that what we are seeing now is the end game of an incredibly vast and well-planned cultural project.

It is because we miss many of these connections that we often cannot see, with clarity, how the culture wars are actually unfolding. I read with great interest a recent column by Rev. Douglas Wilson, eloquently titled “With stirrups raised to Molech.”

“We are now much occupied with the issues swirling around same sex mirage,” he writes, “but we need to take great care not to get distracted. Why have the homosexual activists gone all in on this issue? Why is their prosecutorial zeal so adamant? We went, in just a matter of months, from ‘let’s let individual states’ decide on this, to federal judges striking down state statutes, followed up hard by official harassment of florists, bakers, and photographers. Why the anger, and why the savage over-reach? And do they really think we couldn’t remember all the things they were assuring us of this time last year?”

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

It’s a compelling question, and one that I’ve heard many Christians puzzling over recently. Why do the advocates of the Sexual Revolution despise those who disagree with them so viciously? It is partly because their cultural project does not, as they claim, consist of “living and let live.” It is about compulsory acceptance of any and all sexual behaviors, with tax-payer funding for the rubbers and pills they need to ensure all such behaviors remain sterile, and extermination crews to suction, poison, and dismember any inconvenient fetuses that may come into being as the result of casual coitus.

The ancient mantra “the State has no business in the bedrooms of the nation” has long been abandoned—the emboldened Sexual Revolutionaries now demand that politicians show up at their exhibitionist parades of public indecency, force schools to impose their so-called “morally neutral” view of sexuality on children, and force into silence those who still hold to traditional values.

Rev. Wilson, however, thinks that this loud and vicious war on conscience may be about even more than that. The pro-life cause, he notes, has been very successful in the Unites States. The abortion rate is the lowest it has been since 1973. Hundreds of pro-life laws are passing on the state level. The abortion industry has been successfully stigmatized. True, the successes are, for pro-lifers, often too feeble and not nearly adequate enough in the face of such unrestrained bloodshed. Nevertheless, the momentum has turned against the Sexual Revolutionaries who have championed abortion for decades—their shock and anger at the strength of the pro-life movement evident in pro-abortion signs at rallies that read, “I can’t believe I still have to protest this s**t.”

It is because of the pro-life movement’s success, Wilson muses, that the Sexual Revolutionaries may be coming at us with such fury. “If a nation has slaughtered 50 million infants,” he writes, “they are not going to suddenly get a sense of decency over you and your cupcakes. Now this explains their lack of proportion, and their refusal to acknowledge the rights of florists. Someone who doesn’t flinch at the dismemberment of babies is not going to flinch at the dismemberment of some evangelical baker’s conscience. This reveals their distorted priorities, of course, but it also might be revealing a strategy. Is the homosexual lobby doing this because they are freaking out over their losses on the pro-life front? And are they doing so in a way intended to distract us away from an issue where we are slowly, gradually, inexorably, winning?”

It’s a fascinating perspective. It’s true—and has always been true historically—that when one group of human beings is classified as nonhuman by a society as nonhuman and subsequently butchered, the whole of society is degraded. No nation and no culture can collectively and systematically kill so many human beings without a correlating hardening of the conscience. But on the pro-life front, there has been decades of fierce resistance, hundreds of incremental victories, and a renewed energy among the upcoming generation of activists. For the Sexual Revolutionaries who thought the battle was over when Roe v. Wade was announced in 1973, this must be a bitter pill to swallow indeed.

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

, ,

‘Prominent’ Catholics attacking Archbishop Cordileone are big donors to Pelosi and pro-abort Democrats

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne

Note: To sign a petition supporting Archbishop Cordileone, click here

SAN FRANCISCO, CA, April 17, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Big donors to the Democrat Party and pro-abortion Nancy Pelosi are among those publicly harassing San Francisco Archbishop Salvatore Cordileone for protecting Catholic identity in the area’s Catholic high schools.

A big-ticket full-page ad ran April 16 in the San Francisco Chronicle attacking the archbishop and calling Pope Francis to oust him for his efforts to reinforce Catholic principles in the schools.

A number of prominent San Francisco-area residents identifying as Catholic are signatories of the ad, and several are wealthy donors to Democrat entities and pro-abortion politicians, Catholic Vote reports.

Federal Election Commission records indicate Charles Geschke, Adobe Systems chairman and previous head of the Board of Trustees at the University of San Francisco, gave more than $240,000 to Democrat groups, as well as $2,300 to Nancy Pelosi and $4,000 to John Kerry, both politicians who claim to be Catholic but support abortion and homosexual “marriage.”

Also on the list is political consultant and businessman Clint Reilly, who gave nearly $60,000 to Democrat organizations, along with $5,000 to Barack Obama, whose administration vehemently promotes abortion and homosexual “marriage” and has continually opposed religious liberty. Reilly gave $4,600 to Pelosi as well.

Another individual in the ad attacking the archbishop who also gave big campaign donations to California pro-abort Democrats was Lou Giraudo, a former city commissioner and business executive who contributed more than $24,000 to Nancy Pelosi, $6,000 to Dianne Feinstein and $4,300 to Barbara Boxer.

Nancy Pelosi herself challenged the archbishop for his stance on Catholic teaching last year when she tried to pressure him out of speaking at the March for Marriage in Washington D.C., claiming the event was “venom masquerading as virtue.”

The archbishop responded in a letter that he was obliged “as a bishop, to proclaim the truth—the whole truth—about the human person and God’s will for our flourishing ... especially the truth about marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife.”

The April 16 ad attacking Archbishop Cordileone was the latest in an ongoing assault since the archbishop took steps in February to strengthen Catholic identity in the schools and clarify for faculty and staff in handbooks and contract language the long-standing expectation that they uphold Church principles. 

It said Archbishop Cordileone has “fostered an atmosphere of division and intolerance” and called on Pope Francis to remove him.

“Holy Father, Please Provide Us With a Leader True to Our Values and Your Namesake,” the ad said. “Please Replace Archbishop Cordileone.”

The Confraternity of Catholic Clergy (CCC), a national association for priests and deacons, condemned Archbishop Cordileone’s harassers in a statement, saying the archbishop “teaches in conformity to the Catechism of the Catholic Church.”

“The character assassination and uncharitable venom being cast upon a bishop merely defending the doctrines of his religion is appalling and repugnant,” the CCC said. 

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

“It is totally inappropriate, improper and unjust for the media and others to vilify and brutally attack him when he is doing precisely what an ordained minister and pastor of souls is obligated to do,” the group stated, “namely, speak the truth in season and out of season.”

Those behind the attack ad said the proposed handbook language was mean-spirited, and that they were “committed Catholics inspired by Vatican II,” who “believe in the traditions of conscience, respect and inclusion upon which our Catholic faith was founded.”

The Archdiocese of San Francisco denounced the ad upon its release, saying it was a misrepresentation of Catholic teaching and the nature of the teacher contract, and a misrepresentation of the spirit of the Archbishop.

“The greatest misrepresentation of all is that the signers presume to speak for “the Catholic Community of San Francisco,” the archdiocese responded. “They do not.”

The CCC pointed out that just as physicians are expected to be faithful to the Hippocratic Oath, bishops, priests, and deacons are expected to be faithful to the Church, its teachings and its authority, “since their objective is the salvation of souls, not a popularity contest.” 

In openly declaring their support for Archbishop Cordileone, the group urged the media and others to show “prudence, civility, and fair-mindedness” toward those with whom they disagree.

“He took an oath to be faithful to the Gospel,” the Confraternity stated of Archbishop Cordileone, “and in the words of the disciples in the New Testament, ‘better to obey God than men.’”

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook