|
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
Not Even A Fig Leaf At Toronto's Gay Parade 2001
Each year, the Toronto Gay Parade continues to degenerate. Last
year, for example, the TNT Men of Toronto (Totally Nude Torontonians)
marched with either a scrap of cloth or piece of aluminum foil covering
their private parts.
This year, however, they dispensed with even this pretense of modesty,
and brazenly marched completely nude. No charges were laid against
them.
The only change this year was that the fearless
Toronto police force decided against having a booth of their own
at the Gay Parade.
Numbers Greatly Exaggerated
As usual, the press greatly exaggerated the numbers
attending the Gay Pride Parade, claiming there were an incredible
1,000,000 in attendance. (The Globe and Mail exaggerated
only slightly less, claiming a "mere" 750,000.) If either
figure were accurate, the crowds would have had to be 80 deep along
the 3.1 kilometer parade route: an absurdity. The crowd density
was on average 4-6 people deep and the total number of people can
be generously set, at most, at approximately 154,000 persons, fewer
than attend Toronto's annual Cabana Parade each August. This fact
did not deter the media from spouting the million-attendance figure.
They and homosexual activists deliberately inflate the true attendance
figures in an attempt to claim they have society's approval.
Public Officials Refuse to Act
Over the years, REAL Women has carried out extensive
correspondence with the offices of Toronto Chief of Police, the
Ontario Attorney General, and the Ontario Solicitor General requesting
that the Criminal Code provisions against nudity (S.173 and S.174),
and indecent exhibitions in a public place (S.175) be enforced by
the Toronto police during the Toronto Gay Pride Parade.
In their most recent responses, the provincial
Attorney General David Young and Solicitor General, David Turnbull,
claim they cannot interfere with police action. The Deputy Police
Chief, David Boyd, in turn, claims no charges can be laid against
the nude participants because the evidence lacks "the essential
ingredients necessary for a criminal conviction." REAL Women,
however, enclosed actual photographs of the public nudity at the
Gay Parade with our letter, clearly demonstrating that an offence
had occurred. In a telephone conversation we had with
Deputy Police Chief Boyd, by the way, he stated that the "essential
ingredient' referred to in his letter was a supposed lack of "criminal
intent " (mens rea). This is utter nonsense. Even if this were
the case, criminal intent is a matter for the courts
to determine, not the police.
Frustrated by these efforts to obscure the obvious,
REAL Women has now laid an official complaint with the Ontario Civilian
Commission on Police Services.
Further, on July 24, 2001, we wrote to the Ontario
Solicitor General , David Turnbull, pointing out to him the provisions
of the Ontario Police Services Act, which gives him the authority
to refer this matter to the Ontario Civilian Commission on Police
Services. We requested that he do so immediately.
Why Are Homosexuals Being Given Special Protection?
To put this matter as simply as possible, if anyone
else (especially an individual known to be pro-life/family!)
dared walk nude down Toronto's Yonge Street, would charges be laid
against him/her? There is no doubt that the answer would be "yes."
There are possibly one or two explanations as to
why homosexual activists are receiving special treatment by the
Toronto police. One explanation is that the Crown Prosecutor's office
in the Attorney General's Department is giving special protection
to homosexual displays of nudity. This may be a matter of policy
or because one of the more influential Crown prosecutors in that
office is the homosexual activist, Michael Leschner. Mr. Leschner
previously brought a number of successful court challenges in Ontario
on behalf of himself and his same-sex partner. His most recent challenge
involves his application for a marriage license for him and his
partner. When refused a license, Mr. Leschner applied to the courts,
demanding full marriage rights for same-sex partners. This case
is to be argued in Ontario this fall. Does he have sufficient influence
to block the laying of charges? Possibly.
In this regard, it is noted that in the notorious
M and H Supreme Court of Canada decision, in which
same-sex partners were granted the same benefits as legally married
couples, the Ontario Attorney General's Department actually handed
the case over to the homosexual challengers by conceding in its
arguments that homosexuals suffer discrimination as prohibited under
S.15 of the Charter. Also, the Attorney General has refused to become
involved with the Ontario same-sex marriage challenge to be argued
this fall. A reasonable person would have expected the Ontario Attorney
General to uphold and support the law on marriage in the province
before the courts.
Alternatively, is the Toronto Police Force simply
too intimidated by homosexual activists and their strongest lobbyists,
the media, to enforce the law as it is required to do? Possibly.
We must continue to insist that the law be impartially
upheld and applied to everyone. Special protection should not be
provided to select individuals, i.e., homosexuals/lesbians and their
special interest groups.
Please write to the following, objecting to the failure to impartially
enforce the law:
Mr. Julian Fantino, Chief of Police
Metropolitan Toronto Police
40 College Street
Toronto ON M5G 2J3
Tel: (416) 808-2222 (ask for his office)
Fax: (416) 808-8002
The Honourable David Young
Attorney General of Ontario
11th Floor, 720 Bay Street
Toronto ON M5G 2K1
Tel: (416) 326-4000
Fax: (416) 326-4016
The Honourable David Turnbull
Office of the Minister
Ministry of the Solicitor General
25 Grosvenor Street, 11th Floor
Toronto ON M7A 1Y6
Tel: (416) 326-5075
Fax: (416) 326-5085
BACK TO TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
