There be problems in paradise. The Conservatives are now under attack over their funding for, wait for it, a gay pride parade. Social Conservatives out east are fuming at the funding from the Federal Conservatives to the yearly Toronto Pride Week.

A yearly festival in which not only a parade is conducted, ethnic and cultural exchanges also occur. It’s a tad bit more than just the gay community getting together and having a big ole bash–it draws people together, creates a wealth of both understanding and community, and, of course, attracts tourists. Which is why, I suppose, why Minister of State for Small Business and Tourism Diane Ablonczy okayed the funding.
Which brings us back to the fuming Conservatives in Toronto. According www.lifesitenews.com, a fellow by the name of Brian Rushfeldt, who is the Executive Director of the Canada Family Action Coalitio (CFAC), said

“The reference to the $400,000 for the Toronto sex parade is, I think, appalling,” he said. “That we’ve got the financial crisis that we do and we give that kind of tax money, taxpayer’s money, to such an event. I think when we give away the taxpayer’s money, we have to ask, what does it contribute to society and to the public? What does the public benefit from it?”

Also, Campaign Life Coalition’s (CLC) Jeff Gunnarson commented to the previously stated source:

“Given the fact that the Conservative government supports marriage as a union of one man and one woman in Section 68 iii of their Policy Declaration, I am concerned that they find it prudent to give nearly half a million dollars to a group that diametrically opposes that very section of the policy.

“Secondly, I am profoundly disappointed that the Minister of Tourism, who is pro-life and voted against so called same-sex marriage is ‘pleased’ to give this money to an unabashedly anti- traditional family group.”

Gunnarson also later commented that the boon from having a short term stimulus based on none-child bearing groups is wasteful. Huh. The issue is with that prognosis is that the long term effects of direct investments in economies always return to their longterm equilibriums. According to my economics friend, of course. I suppose Gunnarson forgot about that tidbit.

Oh well. There is always the fallback claim that the government still needs t o do its duty, with their ideological backbone being secondary to such. Thing is, though, is that as Brian Rushfelt stated later in the www.lifesitenews.com article,

“So why the Minister would not just send the check off if she’s going to give the money out, which may be required because of the way the program’s set up, but certainly to make a big splash of it, I think is very inappropriate.”

So, looks like there is a slight bit of dischord in the party lines of the Conservative party. This contentious issue will be fun to watch…