More censorship at the Toronto Star

The issue here is the Toronto Star's apparent double-speak. The photograph that appears in the Star shows Justin Trudeau in a Pride Parade alongside a young women with her breasts exposed. The Star blurred out her nipples. Thus my unpublished letter of August 8, 2015. 

Re Topless photos with Trudeau cause Internet commotion, Aug. 7:

The Toronto Star promotes the Pride parade as a "family event." In other words, you recommend we take our children to see topless women in the flesh. Yet, when it comes to publishing photographs of this "family event," you indulge in censorship, as in this case. Can you explain this double-dealing scented with a whiff of hypocrisy?

"Us" and "them"

Why are gay issues always framed as religious issues?  

What about the non-believer who does not favour gay marriage or people marching naked in public, because rightly or wrongly, he believes it against nature or for social reasons?  

Our courts and human rights tribunals operate on a winner take all basis, a "us" against "them" mentality. The result exacerbates differences of opinion and fosters the no-compromise mentality so favoured by the media. 

Diversity works both ways. What needed is clearer legislation and tribunals better trained to resolve such issues to provide accommodation for all honestly held points of view.

The messenger apologizes for the message. Wrong.

Canada Post has issued a public apology. What did this bedraggled enterprise do that demanded such an action?  It learned that it had delivered to residents of Happy Valley-Goose Bay flyers that condemn gay marriage and homosexuality. 

This gives rise to the obvious question -- With all its current problems has Canada Post also become an censorship agency? Is the messenger now responsible for the message?  Must it read and approve of every flyer it delivers? 

A letter to the Toronto Star that expressed similar reaction to the newspaper's report (Canada post sorry got anti-gay flyers, March 6) was published March 16, 2014.

Is the media gay-obsessed?

Letter to the Toronto Star, May 2, 2013 

Only someone on politically correct steroids would object to someone else favouring the traditional family (Realtor under fire for anti-gay brochure, May 2). Shame on the Star for claiming such expression as "anti-gay."

One may differ from the many reports that prove the superiority of the traditional family. To declare them hateful or anti-anybody is an attempt to suppress opinions with which one may disagree. Unfortunately, the media, less than unbiased in this matter, refuse to defend free speech, preferring to indulge in name-calling.

 * * *

Letter to The Globe and Mail, August 8, 2013

The Globe editorial about the press conference aboard the pope's aircraft claimed that Francis's statement "made history" when he said, "A gay person who is seeking God, who is of goodwill, well, who am I to judge?" It  made history only to those who haven't been listening. The pope said nothing new.

The basis of this common media error is the idee fixe that promotion of the traditional family is anti-gay. 

Recent pro-family protests in Paris were described as anti-gay. The legislation that provoked the protest was deemed an attack on the traditional family in a nation that values the family more than we do. Thus, the protest. 

A report in the Toronto papers told of a tenant in public housing. He posted a pro-family sign in his window, just pro, not attacking anyone. Someone complained. He was threatened with eviction. No one in the media defended his freedom of expression.