So the Charter of Rights debate as we now see has a wrench thrown in the mix "Gay Marriage" a right that was never asked for out rightly by any LGBT group or individual including JFLAG.
So the Christian right and the grandstanding politicians and some legal pundits are using this side issue to deny rights to persons of different orientations than those of the so called mainstream majority. This issue of gay marriage was hinted at by the Lawyer's Christian Fellowship namely one Shirley Richards an Attorney at Law, as far back as the Charter of Rights Debate had begun under the People's National Party regime. Why are they afraid of embracing persons of different orientations?
Do they think homosexuality is infectious and somehow by touch or association with someone gay you can become infected?
For the procreation promoters the sign above says it, at least we won't produce unwanted children from indiscriminate sex only to have them cleaning windshields or have them die in a fire while in the care of the state - Armadale mess & Other Armadale stories.
PM showing support AFTER THE FACT, the kids are dead, where was the state support during their housing in the prison type conditions they were in?
Where were these Christians to take care of these kids? instead they run churches to enrich their pockets and then want to peep through my bedroom keyhole and deny my consensual right to privacy by punishing me and my partner.
see Feb 15, 2006 Gleaner article here:
hear the panic from Miss Shirley Richards a member of the LCC:
"Our concern," said Richards, "is that these words, as innocuously sounding as they are, can be interpreted to allow for adult consensual homosexual conduct in private," said Richards. She added that once homosexual acts are decriminalised, there would be no basis to bar to gay marriage. Mrs. Richards added that the concept of privacy also deals with abortion rights."If the government wants to decriminalise either homosexuality or abortion then it must do so squarely. Don't tell us that this will never happen under your watch and then allow for a few choice words in the charter which you know are capable of having this meaning," said Mrs. Richards.
Other articles of interest:
Other search results (may appear different depending on your location and browser used)
Obviously this gay marriage opposing argument is being used as a smoke screen as said by JFLAG's Program's Manager in a recent radio interview to bolster the morality stance taken by the panicking Christan right who think that gays rights activists and gays themselves will somehow homosexualise the country. What nonsense? one is either gay, str8 bisexual and all other variants in between and if one so chooses one will act on the sexual urges or not where one feels to. Don't forget Asexuals as well who have no interest in sex but more on emotional connections.
So the Charter of may never recognise gays, lesbians, intersexuals, transsexuals or gender non conformists. So we don't exist and be better of dead, WHAT A WAY TO INSTITUTIONALISE HOMOPHOBIA.
also see:
Not Much has changed since eh....Charter of Rights Bill Deliberations
Promoting homosexuality? No, its about freedom of choice, privacy & tolerance
Not Much has changed since eh....Charter of Rights Bill Deliberations
Promoting homosexuality? No, its about freedom of choice, privacy & tolerance
What about basic rights for all citizens despite differences and why would gays ask for marriage equality before even securing recognition of us as human beings. So what if marriage equality was asked for, for argument's sake will it take away from heterosexuals right to marry or procreate as some push the argument that same sex persons cannot as a couple.
We are not dumb we all know that already but not all gays want children anyway and if they do some choose various means of getting kids. Adoption, artificial insemination, surrogate parents or expressed permission for sexual intercourse with member of the opposite sex.
What are these folks afraid of? they think some children are going to be poisoned by associating with someone who is gay? Utter nonsense. They themselves would have been gay already.
Peace
H
.mkv_000108708.jpg){kind=spacer}
.mkv_000109059.jpg){kind=spacer}
.mkv_000113988.jpg){kind=spacer}
.jpg)
+(Light).jpg)
1 comments:
Truly Horrifying but true Howie...they unfortunately do think that homosexuality is contagious...and the tendency is to conflate it with paedophilia.
To the likes of Shirley Richards and her ilk the only people with rights are heterosexual Christians...somehow the Message of Love as preached by the Christ they profess to be following has escaped them.
Sometimes I wonder if the preoccupation, that these so called Christian types have with policing sexuality and reproduction, is not a front to divert attention from some really nasty little secrets they have in their own closets.
Post a Comment