Why do tax payers have to fund LGBTQ organizations?

From the Ottawa Citizen: LGBTQ+ charities and non-profits face increasing financial struggle. Fae Johnstone the executive director of Queer Momentum:

We need to support the organizations making equality real. 

Ah, no we don't. I don't want to give any more of my tax dollars to LGBTQ ideology. Canadians already give LGBTQ millions.

LGBTQ+ charities and non-profits deliver critical services and programs to the most vulnerable queer people. In Ottawa and across Canada, they're facing the perfect storm: economic precarity, government belt-tightening and corporations rescinding financial support, all made worse by a social and political climate increasingly hostile to LGBTQ+ acceptance. 

Cry me a river. 

If they want more money to fund their ideology let them fundraise for it. They've already received enough from the taxpayer. Kind Space received $1,077,389 in the past five years from government. Ten Oaks received $334,019. And Queer Momentum has received $395,325 for a total of almost $2 million dollars.

One of the commenters on this article made some excellent points as to why we do not need to fund these charities:

Sexual-identity-based charities rest on the flawed premise that people require different forms of support because of who they are, rather than because of what they are experiencing. Homelessness, depression, addiction, trauma, and poverty are sadly universal human conditions in our society. They do not become categorically different when experienced by LGBTQ+ individuals. Creating parallel, identity-filtered charities ultimately fragments service delivery, duplicates infrastructure, and diverts what is already scarce funding from more deserving outcome-driven programs that serve far more people.

In a time where Canadians have few and few dollars to give to charities, part thanks to our Liberal government running out of other peoples money, prioritizing identity over demonstrated need and measurable effectiveness is just plain inefficient and worse yet, exclusionary. It also risks turning charitable work into ideological signaling rather than practical problem-solving. Universal challenges are best addressed through inclusive needs-based institutions that treat people equally and allocate resources based on severity and impact. Compassion scales when it is universal and outcome-focused; it weakens when it is segmented by identity. Charity should reduce suffering, not organize it along political or social classifications.

Dying with Dignity lobby lobby lobby

Dying with Dignity lobbies more government bureaucrats and politicians.

• Rachel Putnins, Director of Parliamentary Affairs, MP Will Greaves | House of Commons
• Thomas Law, Advisory, Policy and Regional Affairs | Justice Canada (JC)
• Julie Robinson, Legal Counsel for Constitutional Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations | Justice Canada (JC)
• 
  

More tax dollars to sexual and reproductive health and rights

Minister Valdez announces $15.5 million in federal funding to strengthen national women’s organizations across Canada

"This investment will help advance the work of organizations focused on justice, leadership, sexual and reproductive health and rights, and gender-based violence. The organizations that will receive funding will be selected in the coming weeks.

The Canadian Research Institute for the Advancement of Women (CRIAW) will receive up to $1 million to collaborate with other national women’s organizations, as well as key stakeholders beyond the women’s sector. This initiative will support a more sustainable and coordinated sector that is better positioned to advance action on persistent gender inequalities over the long term."

What nonsense. Our government already gives way too much funding to women's organizations. Why are we giving more? How about we pay down our massive debt instead?

Dying with Dignity's lucrative death business

In 2024 Dying with Dignity Canada had $9,231,137 in assets, of which $7,370,174 was in long term investments. They have so much of their money in these long term investments that clearly they don't need those funds to run their day to day business, so they invest them. They made $752,804 in interest on those long-term investments and an additional $3,038,792 in donations in 2024. 

Dying with Dignity aggressively fund raises because (unbelievably) there's still lots more money people want to give them. And because they are a charity, they do not pay federal income tax on their earnings. 

Truly the euthanasia business is a very very successful business model. 

Dying with Dignity attacks conscience rights

Dear Health Minister Marjorie Michel and Justice Minister Sean Fraser,

I am writing to you to tell you that I am appalled at Dying with Dignity's court challenge to end forced transfer for medical assistance in dying. DWDC argues that https://www.dyingwithdignity.ca/advocacy/institutional-religious-obstructions/

"Individual clinicians have the right to object, for conscience reasons, to providing MAID or other medical treatments. The issue of IROs is not about the objection of clinicians, but that of institutions, which do not have conscience rights."

Bollocks. Institutions are made up of individual people. These individual people work in these institutions because they share the values of the institution. In this case it means that the health care providers at the institution must have their conscience rights protected. 

Dying with Dignity uses their millions in donations to fight against the conscience rights of people who are against participating in the evil of state sanctioned euthanasia. They have the money to lobby government (and they do so incessantly) and are hell bent on forcing these institutions to be involved in this killing. This is diabolical. 

Our government must protect the conscience rights of these health care providers at all of our hospitals to not commit MAID. IT is the ethical and moral thing to do.

Sincerely,

Patricia Maloney