It's not that Grenada is unwilling to honour its obligation.
The Caricom nation has made a proposal to renegotiate the loan as its economy is still feeling the effects of the devastation brought on by Hurricane Ivan in 2004 and a drop in tourism after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. The Taiwanese, however, are not prepared to enter into any debt rescheduling arrangement because the Grenadians made the 'error' of severing diplomatic ties with Taiwan in favour of rival China.
So, now, Grenada faces the indignity of having its port fees seized -- a move that would further depress its economy — simply because it upset a benefactor. In the case of the threat issued by Prime Minister Cameron over the weekend, the British are in no way being as iniquitous as the Taiwanese. After all, the aid they are pledging to slash is their own money and they are at liberty to do with it as they please. "Britain," Mr Cameron is reported as saying, "is one of the premier aid givers in the world. We want to see countries that receive our aid adhering to proper human rights."
But while the British leader's statement is directed more at African states that have strong anti-gay legislation, his policy essentially applies to all Commonwealth countries, including Jamaica, where, due to religious and/or cultural beliefs, homosexuality is not accepted. Of course, he conceded that the countries targeted could not change immediately. That, we hold, should be the general position of the international community and the homosexual lobby. For it is unreasonable to expect that societies with prejudices rooted in a culture that, in most instances is a legacy of British Empire laws, will, overnight, accept a lifestyle that runs counter to those laws. Where the homosexual lobby and their supporters have erred is in trying to force their lifestyle on societies that regard it as wrong and ungodly.
And while we do not support laws that persecute people because of their sexual preferences, we hold firmly to the belief that threats, like that issued by Prime Minister Cameron, would not have seen the light of day had those countries that now gleefully accept monetary aid put their economies in order.
Smoke is in the room and it is choking us and everyone else so much so that we all are saying and believing foolishness and the hype or wrench thrown in the mix whenever this debate comes up. HOMOSEXUALITY IS NOT ILLEGAL IN JAMAICA, sorry but I had to scream it and that is precisely why the debate is clouded, the beginning of this article/editorial just turns me as I have heard everywhere else including supposedly knowledgeable journalists and lawyers saying it is. What is illegal is the act of buggery or sodomy and even that is debatable as well as sodomy infers a kind of predatory tinge to it or forced sexual advances from a same sexed perpetrator as was deemed in the 1500s when this law came to be under Henry VIII. As for the supposed imposition I was made to understand the veiled threat from the UK PM was directed towards more caustic states in Africa to which some have responded in kind claiming being dictated to. I had hinted to the issue of imposition by foreign bodies in a previous post when the story first broke on GLBTQJA Wordpress seen below:
.........But what will that do though in the long run if most states and including Jamaica outside of the region mentioned in the article have a strong beliefs or perception that homosexuality is an import and that actions such as this are forcing the hand of countries with “christian principles” and “high moral values” to capitulate to the powerful gay lobby from first world nations yet The Prime Minister David Cameron is not gay but could be viewed as a puppet in the scheme of this with the pressure coming and positions from the European Union side of things and other bodies such as the United Nations on sexual orientation. Is forcing countries to comply the way to go? Or hitting them economically? I don’t think so, certainly other diplomatic methods can be employed but what about the notion that anti gay forces in the United States are in effect exporting homophobia and funding anti gay and religious fanaticism especially in parts of Africa in recent times. What does Mr. Cameron et al have to say or do about that?, these powerful backers behind such moves are said to be numerous and are some of the biggest companies and individuals allegedly.
Will the UK also criticize those backers and demand they stop this kind of clandestine support or be made to stop? Can or will the UK Prime Minister stand up to the police man of the world and call it for what it is? Are we going to solve the issue of tolerance this way folks? I don’t think so, the hitting of the economic prosperity of these non compliant states as it were may only serve to bring more harm to the voices and populations on the ground who are made to pay the price as involuntary martyrs for this kind of pressure. While I can understand the need for rights and recognition to be extended to the common man this incessant push to seemingly impose it on the rest of the problematic states is unjustified for now, I say more dialogue bearing in mind also other countries who may have similar anti gay positions and laws with dire societal consequences are watching this and may feel justified in tacitly supporting homophobic acts even more so whilst becoming hardlined on budging from their no ease on buggery positions. We saw the recent comments but the Antiguan and Barbudan Attorney General on the law there on the strength of a legal challenge mounted by a group in Belize named UNIBAM This debate has no end soon so let us see.
The particular tranche of aid that maybe affected is a bilateral one known as general support,the aid was vital as it was used to rehabilitation programs for deportees who are helped to rejoin society, training and support. National Security Minister Dwight Nelson said on a radio interview that if aid was cut Jamaica could not afford to run such a program at this time.
Why is Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays, JFLAG so silent?
In response to that an answer from one of the Programs personnel dismissed the question as if it is not important, the exact words in a forum were:
"Truth is, if you read what Cameron said you realise it has no bearing on us. Do we even get budgetary support from Britain? Cutting aid is standard practice, it is nothing new. Why are we getting so fussed up about it? If my memory serves me correct, US withdrew money to an organ of the UN last week because of its work in China. The person who has the power of the purse use it to their benefit and it is a very old practice. There really isn't that much of a story in this. Activists are using the opportunity to respond to requests from the media to speak on the issue"
Aloofness as per usual, so much for that, I guess the negative perceptions that we are trying to homosexualize Jamaica, bugger our children and white foreigners imposing their beliefs on us are of no importance to the J coupled with the fallouts in the form of homophobic and lesbophobic violence that usually comes with when homosexuality hits the mainstream news?
Peace and tolerance
also see more comments on these posts from other rights activists:
Jamaica should refuse British aid – Families Against State Terrorism convener ………………
CVM TV's Live @ 7 on the UK AID Withdrawal threat & responses .......