Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination (SASOD) Guyana is the big 10

Celebrating its diamond, 10th anniversary, the Society Against Sexual Orientation Discrimination (SASOD) hosted a series of activities at Moray House on Camp and Quamina Streets on Monday, June 24. A 20-minute documentary titled “SASOD at 10” highlighting SASOD’s work on equality in Guyana over the past decade was launched. The film’s Producer, renowned local journalist, Gordon Moseley, in his remarks, shared insights on making the documentary, and reflected on SASOD’s growth since 2003, encouraging all Guyanese to support indigenous NGOs like SASOD who are working on issues related to human rights and equality in the country.

Ten diamond-shaped plaques were then presented as appreciation awards to organisations and individuals who have supported SASOD’s work on equality for lesbian gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) equality over the years. Guest speaker, Pandit Deodat Tillack, in his feature remarks, emphasized the need for human beings to live in harmony without prejudice to others, and emphatically thanked the awardees for their support to SASOD, re-affirming his own as well.

Pandit Deodat Tillack delivering his feature remarks.

The 10 appreciation awards were presented by SASOD representatives in these categories:

Media
1. Print Media: Stabroek News
2. Broadcast Media: HBTV Channel 9 First Look News
3. Internet Media: Demerara Waves
4. Journalist: Johann Earle

Civil Society
5. Civil Society Group: Red Thread
6. Civil Society Ally: Ms. Margaret Lawrence

Private Sector
7. Private Sector Entity: Sidewalk Café & Jazz Club
8. Private Sector Ally: Mr. Clinton Urling

Specific Sectors
9. Human Rights Lawyer: Mr. Gino Persaud
10. Faith Leader: Bishop Francis Alleyne, O.S.B.

SASOD’s 10th anniversary cake was cut by Mr. Frédéric Roberts, Programme Manager for External Relations of the Regional Section at the Delegation of the European Union (EU), and Ms. Zenita Nicholson, Secretary of SASOD’s trusteeship board, whose birthday was that day. The EU is one of SASOD’s principal donors through a partnership with UK-based INGO, Equal Rights Trust, with funding from the European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights.

Mr. Frédéric Roberts and Ms. Zenita Nicholson cutting the 10th anniversary cake.

Ms. Joan McDonald, Administrator of Moray House Trust, cut the ribbon to open the week-long “SASOD at 10” photo-exhibition. SASOD trustee Ms. Ulelli Verbeke - the photographer who captured the images and curated the photo-exhibition - was also at Moray House on Monday.

 

Ms. Joan Mc Donald cuts ribbon to open SASOD’s photo-exhibition at Moray House.

SASOD’s Advocacy and Communications Officer, Mr. Leon Bacchus, who chaired the day’s activities, commented that “this event showcases the evolution and some of the progress SASOD has made over the years through its work on LGBT human rights in Guyana and I am proud to share these achievements with the public. SASOD will continue to hold public events like these to reach out and further inform and sensitize members of the public about LGBT issues in Guyana.”

SASOD’s 10th anniversary events were supported by British High Commission Georgetown and the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, as well as the DC-based Centre for Black Equity.

The “SASOD at 10” documentary can be viewed on SASOD’s YouTube channel.

SASOD's work on Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) equality and human rights over the past decade in Guyana, in commemoration of the organisation's 10th anniversary in June 2013. The film's Producer is Gordon Moseley, and its Assistant Producer is Alana Da Silva.

Congratulations to them, our own JFLAG though not up to par as they really ought to and can be will be 15 years old this year in December.
Peace and tolerance

H

Gay Genocide Jamaica - response to Betty Blaine's homo-paedophile conflation

In recent days anti gay/abortionist activist Betty Ann Blaine has been on a roll making some rather spurious statements in media and otherwise, case in point her post on Facebook some days ago and her ridiculous call for the phantom tapes of murdered Ambassador Peter King imputing a homo-paedophile motive as a reason not to decriminalise buggery. 

She like her counterparts continue to conflate same gender sex with abuse, the supposed sexual orientation of the abuser is immaterial when dealing with the psychology surrounding paedophilia, once any adult has any sexual attraction to a child that is a diagnosable disorder that can be addressed by the requisite professional and courses, homosexuality on the other hand is not a disorder thus no need for such actions including the well touted reparative therapy which is being outlawed around the world coupled with that the closure of the leading US based Ex-Gay Ministries: EX Gay Ministries to close, founder issues apology..

also see my post on sister blog GLBTQJA Wordpress: 

Betty Ann Blaine’s arrant nonsense request of Peter King Tapes

Here is the response as prepared by: Donnamarie Hamilton-Ross

Since Betty Ann Blaine was given as verifiable reference, I am posting here a reply to her appearance on the CVM Sunrise show and her post that she will die before the Act is repealed. Some years ago, she was very involved with actual care, love, and advocacy for children. I found her to be an amazing woman, worthy of admiration. Her interests have been sidelined into something that I will again state, leads to genocidal acts.

I work in the field of HIV/AIDS. I found myself walking from place to place and meeting many people, some good, some not good. I did not care if they were gay or not. They were just people. Some strong, some weak, some frightened, some betrayed, some a source of betrayals. I lost many people I came to love. Some died of AIDS and some were murdered. And my heart broke trying to help the children as there were so many things I had to learn. Anyhow -this is the post, and these are the same things that disappoint me because it has not changed. The children I was able to help are big now. Some have children of their own. I am tired of the flinging of red herring to distract Jamaicans from the real problems ___http://www.cvmtv.com/videos_1.php?id=1423&section=sunrise ...

Just got to watch the taped video –

#1. Asked was the question - What are the law(s) that you are against them repealing? Here is the answer. "The Buggery Act 1533, formally An Acte for the punysshement of the vice of Buggerie (25 Hen. 8 c. 6), was an Act of the Parliament of England that was passed during the reign of Henry VIII. It was the country's first civil sodomy law, such offences previously dealt with by the ecclesiastical courts. The Act defined buggery as an unnatural sexual act against the will of God and man. This was later defined by the courts to include only anal penetration and bestiality.[3] The Act remained in force until it was repealed and replaced by the Offences against the Person Act 1828, and buggery would remain a capital offence until 1861."

It is now 2013 – In Jamaica "Sexual acts between men are punishable with up to ten years imprisonment. Sexual acts between women are legal."

#2 Please provide verified information regarding the 74% increase in children sodomised as you stated in the interview.

#3 Do you remember hearing about the male street children aged 12 to 15 that were preyed upon by Jamaican men, some in high places in 2005 and 2006? Or the little girl, 7 years old (from Rema 2005), another boy was 6 (St. James, 2003,) what was done about that? Do you know why two men in St. James were killed and set on fire by children? Both men were vicious and had videotapes. Will having the tapes make any difference?
Another topic was brought to public attention, men that were part of a suspected pedophile ring, some of the men said they adopted boys they had, and there is no record. If you are going to protect young children male and female from pedophiles as you were asked to do 8 years ago, I will help.

Most of the street children are boys. Where are the girls? Are they still being trafficked around the island?

#4 Political agendas come in different formats. Leave the adults. This buggery buggery buggery conversation is a waste of time. Sometimes it just seems like folks like the sound of the word on their tongues. There are more street children, go find them. The schools have major problems go help fix that. There are HIV positive women that do not tell sexual partners, and have children. Change that. Find a way to provide enough clean water in all districts for all children. Help the grandmothers that have to take care of children. Find income generation programs for mothers so that the children can go to school and make a better life. Those things are important. Sexual practices between consenting adults is not your concern, you would know the history of the law and its status.

#5 Lastly, setting up genocidal situations, that is my concern. The musicians, politicians, preachers and others setting up funding through press attention are genocidal acts. Here is a photo of what is being set up - the video is no longer available it was considered too violent for the public. Is this what you want?

also see: 

What goes on in the minds of the overly religious?

Is praying for homosexual change bordering on blas...phemy?

Church claims future victimization if buggery is decriminalized

JFLAG Position Statement on Upcoming Conscience Vote

Buggery law challenge: Hearing pushed back to October

Shame On Church - Clergyman Charges Christians

The False Dichotomy of the religious right on the LGBT Advocacy's Godlessness

and JFLAG's very late response after all these years of abuse from this woman in media, she has been allowed to expand her platform basically unchecked and unchallenged especially after her failure at the NDM leadership then the NNC while she demanded tapes then too, she should have had at least half a dozen press releases stuffed down her throat already, JFLAG waited too long to respond, see:

Betty-Ann Blaine Must Be Honest About Child Sexual Abuse

Another response from a CARIFLAG representative:

"I think you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the case which concerns the AMENDMENT to the buggery law to no longer criminalize CONSENSUAL same-sex intimacy in PRIVATE. That is the essence of Jaghai's challenge that you have decided to intervene in. At the same time I don't think you are interested in the truth since you have an agenda of self-promotion to push.

Your concerns are legitimate but no one ever suggested a repeal that would make children vulnerable. If our legislators were to REPEAL the sections of the Offences of the Persons Act we call 'the buggery law' they would also have to amend other sections of the Sexual Offences Act to criminalize what in essence would be anal rape. But of course you neglect to mention this because it does not suit your campaign.

Also, your calls for the state to release evidence in a criminal investigation to YOU because you have a personal interest in it is vulgar, crass, and disrespectful to the rule of law. Please find another way of getting your point across without mandating the justice system to cater to your needs."

The US Supreme Court DOMA Decision & White House Statement

In a major victory for US gay rights, the Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a provision of a federal law denying federal benefits to married gay couples and cleared the way for the resumption of same-sex marriage in California. SEE FULL JUDGEMENT HERE

The justices issued two 5-4 rulings in their final session of the term. One decision wiped away part of a federal anti-gay marriage law that has kept legally married same-sex couples from receiving tax, health and pension benefits.

The Supreme Court ruling striking down the Defense of Marriage Act has stirring language from the majority opinion, as well as pointed rebuttals from the dissents. The majority opinion, written by Anthony Kennedy, speaks eloquently about the importance of dignity in the law.

By contrast, Antonin Scalia fumes in his dissent about the fact the court has embraced same-sex marriage. In particular, Scalia predicts that today’s decision will ultimately lead to all state restrictions on marriage equality being struck down.

Scalia predicted in the case striking down Colorado’s decision to prohibit antidiscrimination protections that that ruling would pave the way for same-sex marriages, so let’s hope his prediction comes true again.

Here are twelve key quotes from today’s ruling.

From the majority opinion:

DOMA instructs all federal officials, and indeed all persons with whom same-sex couples interact, including their own children, that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others. The federal statute is invalid, for no legitimate purpose overcomes the purpose and effect to disparage and to injure those whom the State, by its marriage laws, sought to protect in personhood and dignity. By seeking to displace this protection and treating those persons as living in marriages less respected than others, the federal statute is in violation of the Fifth Amendment.

For same-sex couples who wished to be married, the State [of New York] acted to give their lawful conduct a lawful status. This status is a far-reaching legal acknowledgment of the intimate relationship between two people, a relationship deemed by the State worthy of dignity in the community equal with all other marriages. It reflects both the community’s considered perspective on the historical roots of the institution of marriage and its evolving understanding of the meaning of equality.

Here the State’s decision to give this class of persons the right to marry conferred upon them a dignity and status of immense import. When the State used its historic and essential authority to define the marital relation in this way, its role and its power in making the decision enhanced the recognition, dignity, and protection of the class in their own community.

The avowed purpose and practical effect of the law here in question are to impose a disadvantage, a separate status, and so a stigma upon all who enter into same-sex marriages made lawful by the unquestioned authority of the States.

DOMA, because of its reach and extent, departs from this history and tradition of reliance on state law to define marriage…The Act’s demonstrated purpose is to ensure that if any State decides to recognize same-sex marriages, those unions will be treated as second-class marriages for purposes of federal law.

DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state sanctioned marriages and make them unequal. The principal purpose is to impose inequality, not for other reasons like governmental efficiency. Responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contrives to deprive some couples married under the laws of their State, but not other couples, of both rights and responsibilities.

[DOMA] humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives

Under DOMA, same-sex married couples have their lives burdened, by reason of government decree, in visible and public ways. By its great reach, DOMA touches many aspects of married and family life, from the mundane to the profound.

From Scalia’s dissent:

In the majority’s telling, this story is black-and-white: Hate your neighbor or come along with us. The truth is more complicated. It is hard to admit that one’s political opponents are not monsters, especially in a struggle like this one, and the challenge in the end proves more than today’s Court can handle. Too bad.

But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution.

As I have said, the real rationale of today’s opinion, whatever disappearing trail of its legalistic argle-bargle one chooses to follow, is that DOMA is motivated by “ ‘bare . . . desire to harm’” …How easy it is, indeed how inevitable, to reach the same conclusion with regard to state laws denying same-sex couples marital status.

From Justice Samuel Alito’s dissent:

Past changes in the understanding of marriage — for example, the gradual ascendance of the idea that romantic love is a prerequisite to marriage — have had far-reaching consequences. But the process by which such consequences come about is complex, involving the interaction of numerous factors, and tends to occur over an extended period of time. We can expect something similar to take place if same sex marriage becomes widely accepted. The long-term consequences of this change are not now known and are unlikely to be ascertainable for some time to come.

Today is also the 10th anniversary of Lawrence v. Texas, the day the Supreme Court also struck down sodomy laws on the grounds they violate the privacy rights of individuals. like today's DOMA case, the Lawrence opinion was also written by by Justice Kennedy who said
back then: “These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of person-hood were they formed under compulsion of the State.”

THE WHITE HOUSE Office of the Press Secretary 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 26, 2013

Statement by the President on the Supreme Court Ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act

I applaud the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act. This was discrimination enshrined in law. It treated loving, committed gay and lesbian couples as a separate and lesser class of people. The Supreme Court has righted that wrong, and our country is better off for it. We are a people who declared that we are all created equal – and the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.

This ruling is a victory for couples who have long fought for equal treatment under the law; for children whose parents’ marriages will now be recognized, rightly, as legitimate; for families that, at long last, will get the respect and protection they deserve; and for friends and supporters who have wanted nothing more than to see their loved ones treated fairly and have worked hard to persuade their nation to change for the better.

So we welcome today’s decision, and I’ve directed the Attorney General to work with other members of my Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision, including its implications for Federal benefits and obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.

On an issue as sensitive as this, knowing that Americans hold a wide range of views based on deeply held beliefs, maintaining our nation’s commitment to religious freedom is also vital. How religious institutions define and consecrate marriage has always been up to those institutions. Nothing about this decision – which applies only to civil marriages – changes that.

The laws of our land are catching up to the fundamental truth that millions of Americans hold in our hearts: when all Americans are treated as equal, no matter who they are or whom they love, we are all more free.

###

XXTRAZ

UPDATE JUNE 28 2013

Gleaner Editorial: US Gay Ruling Compelling


The US Supreme Court DOMA strike down has had many Jamaicans talking and a vox pop was done in Kingston and on Facebook by Nationwide radio as to how persons felt about same sex marriage overall and its possibility in Jamaica

PNP’s Bobby Pickersgill differs on Conscience Vote route to decide on Buggery Law

As the Javed Jaghai buggery law constitutional challenge via the charter of rights/sexual offences bill commences today in the Supreme Court Climate Change Minister, Chairman and powerful politician from the ruling People’s National Party has spoken out publicly on the upcoming conscience vote as suggested then promised by his administration through its leader Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller, all hands are not on deck it seems regarding the PM’s suggestion there is no doubt in my mind that diplomatic pressure is also being brought to bear on this issue as to raise this matter in a time when the government is not in a favourable position with the public given the economic challenges, the pending international monetary fund tests (in the present deal), the obvious austerity measures as evidenced with the teachers and other public sector groups who seem in regret mode after signing a wage freeze memorandum. On the eve of the aforementioned Supreme Court case in challenge to the constitutionality of the buggery law in the face of the enacted 2001 Charter of Rights a few voices have been weighing in. Javed Jaghai Education Officer at the Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays, JFLAG on whose behalf the United States based group AIDSFREEWORLD with their attorney locally based (as his asylum status miraculously disappeared) Maurice Tomlinson will head to court on June 25, 2013 with much nervousness and anticipation. Tomlinson’s own tolerance advertisement/Public Service Announcement (still unclear to many what it the real status of the video he is trying to get aired) matter which concluded recently is being deliberated in the constitutional court (the Supreme Court as well). The court challenges have irked several mostly religious groups to which they have mobilized protests and stands in Kingston and Montego Bay on June 23, 2013. They have vowed to do all they can to block with some suggesting martyrdom when no violence has been postulated by the LGBT lobby to block any decriminalization or repeal of the law. An unexpected backlash is brewing as other Christian and secular persons are labelling the antigay religious voices as hypocrites and nitpickers with their selectivity of homosexuality to mobilize themselves yet other ills are overlooked (more below)

Following a People’s National Party National Executive Council, NEC meeting Minister Pickersgill in a press briefing in Spaulding Clarendon on June 23, 2013 said he does not believe a pure conscience vote should be used to decide on the matter of the buggery law, he continued among other things the following:

“I for one don’t believe in conscience votes on such matters of whether you’re a hawk or a dove, whether you are for accommodating homosexuality in terms of the law I don’t believe it should be left up to politicians it should really go to the people; and there are strong views as you know on it the same there are about abortion and capital punishment.”

He also added that Jamaica has been coming under pressure from foreign countries who advocate that homosexuality is a human right.

“A lot of developed countries who had that law before and who over time they have changed it they are now saying it’s a human right, fine but you know we need some time ........... I am not going to go the route of the former Prime Minister (Golding and his not in my Cabinet BBC comment) but we need some time to think about it and more public education; we cannot forget that the church is a very strong constituent in this country and we have to hear their views.”

So like a previous PNP member in 2011/2 Damien Crawford when he hinted that the buggery review when suggested by his present boss in her opposition leader role was not going to occur anytime soon, it was not relevant and it came to pass until May 2013 now we have more of the inside thinking especially from a powerful figure as Mr Bobby Pickersgill. 

Mr Pickersgill and other PNP candidates were the subject of a rather strange ad during the 2011 election season, as to the author's it is unclear but the intent is obvious:

Some questions instantly come to mind:

Is he suggesting that the matter be put to a referendum instead as demanded by some church groups, the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship’s Shirley Richards has hinted that the people should decide and with the over confidence in that arena that they have the numbers to strike it down I am wondering if Mr Pickersgill is trying to wash his hands of blame if it should go either way.

Is this a trap for the LGBT lobby to silence or at least slow down the agitation? This matter if decided not in the affirmative can easily secure the present administration’s going to a second term as their cloudy support now may very well say they never legalised homosexuality (although it is not illegal) and despite the known LGBT support of the party we all know it is about winning elections in politics at the end of the day

Are politicians being lobbied consistently by the LGBT lobby groups such as JFLAG?

Why does JFLAG and others speak out more and what it is that they are actually asking for? The news that the J is now asking for decriminalization (since the last two years and not a full repeal came as a stunner to some even within the LGBT community (while publicly the perception remains they want a full repeal) once again JFLAG’s communication strategy is called into question both at the poor forumatic activity levels to engage the LGBT body politic and the public in general. The flyer typed messaging is simply not enough and the so called town hall meetings that are not openly advertised to the LGBT community to invite comments and consensus when invitations to such meetings are done by a selective basis cannot be the modus operandi, not when the church has what seems full mobilization on their side.

Why doesn’t Mr Pickersgill suggest a full amendment/debate in Parliament on the matter as was done via a parliamentary joint select committee in the 1998 submission made by JFLAG? That would be the more politically correct route in my eyes with a proper open exchange on the floor of the house but obviously politicians still seem afraid to touch this most sensitive issue and a conscience vote or a referendum for that matter are easier ways out to avoid any blame when it goes either way. A referendum might be even more problematic as they are often viewed as political measurements for the particular administration that launches them and is used to see the support or lack thereof on the ground. Hence I feel it is why certain anti gay groups are calling for that route to be taken.

I wonder what the rest of the Cabinet thinks about all this?

I wonder what older politicians in the PNP especially persons such as former senator/Justice Minister and anti gay voice A. J. Nicholson thinks? His historical position on this as always been in strong opposition so much so that he penned a no to gay marriage statement in 2006 under the Ministry of Justice caption as it was thought and still perceived that gay marriage is what the lobby eventually is going after.

What is wrong in asking for gay marriage rights, isn’t the dignity of same gender loving folk important as well, isn’t stability especially in a marginalized group aid to reducing said marginalization and hence normalization with wider positive implications?

I wonder what K. D. Knight also thinks about this as he too was not so supportive in the P. J. Patterson years as Prime Minister even in the face of strong speculation of his own sexual orientation (PJ’s).

If the vote occurs and goes into the affirmative with the necessary amendments what is next, are we prepared for the backlash that is to come, cultural and maybe otherwise?

Will the PNP capitulate to the growing cry for a referendum or more population involvement in this matter from religious voices more so than a Member of Parliament only (with constituents’ sentiments) vote on the floor of parliament?

As the lobby and the nation waits to hear when and how this will all play out and the respective legal challenges also continue to supposedly force the changes from a judicial standpoint we must pay close attention to certain voices and the sentiments; we must also watch closely the parallel debate on abortion it was only this morning a leading anti gay anti abortion advocate Reverend Peter Espeut disagreed on a morning program that even if a woman is raped that she should be allowed the right to terminate that pregnancy as was suggested by youth and culture Minister Lisa Hanna in Parliament last week. He said among other things: “......even a deformed baby has the right to be born, even as a result of rape it is not the child’s fault that they are produced by rape that is no reason for the child to forfeit its life...” (Notice he said child and not zygote or foetus or embryo) he dismissed the viability argument and called it a perverse argument. At a point in a woman’s life when she is interrupted with a most horrible event that produces a life that will always be a reminder to her and those around her who are aware of the ghastly acts for her to carry this child even if she gave it up for adoption may be too painful for some to bear yet Reverend Espeut would much rather have that woman carry the pregnancy to term and live with the possible psychological pain.

So much for absolutism and prescribing for others their choice, similar to the basic invasion of privacy in buggery when all that is agitated for is privacy, the right to choose via the all important consent between adults yet if we follow Espeut el arguments it will amount to wide scale buggery towards the young and the unnaturalness of homosexuality. A prominent attorney-at-law is urging that the conscience vote for the review of the law be done with the views of the members of the constituency taken into consideration, rather than the vote solely being made by the parliamentarians.

Shirley Richards of the anti gay parent group Lawyers Christian Fellowship to Lovemarch wants the voting to be done with the views of the constituency and that these votes should be made public.

"They (parliamentarians) shouldn't be voting on their own conscience. They are representing the people. We want to know how the representatives in parliament vote on this issue. The people should know how their representatives vote," she said.

Referendum

Another legal luminary, Bert Samuels, explained that it certainly will be interesting to see how the parliamentarians vote on this issue. He also said that having a referendum on this matter would represent the highest form of democracy.

"I think there will be a toss-up between fundamentalist Christian values on one side and the liberals on another. Having a referendum on this matter would display the highest form of democracy," he said.

Seventh Day Adventists absent from both marches?

So it seems as The Seventh-Day Adventist Church (SDAC), Jamaica's largest single denominational group did not participate in the anti-gay peace march that the partnership prayer ministry — Prayer 2000 as reported by perpetual post a SDA linked blog. Nigel Coke, Communications Director for the Jamaica Union of Seventh-Day Adventists, told Perceptual Post that the church was not consulted on the matter hence they will not be participating.

In October of 2012, The Seventh-Day Adventist Church reaffirmed its stance against members of the LGBT community, but also softened the denomination’s position statement to offer compassion toward gays and lesbians.

The Church's Official Statement on Homosexuals states that "Jesus affirmed the dignity of all human beings and reached out compassionately to persons and families suffering the consequences of sin. He offered caring ministry and words of solace to struggling people, while differentiating His love for sinners from His clear teaching about sinful practices. As His disciples, Seventh-day Adventists endeavor to follow the Lord’s instruction and example, living a life of Christ-like compassion and faithfulness."

Also not to be outdone is our Prime Minister Mrs Portia Simpson Miller who seems to be making herself fast becoming irrelevant as she claimed she does not listen to news or criticisms and has been disturbingly silent on rather serious issues including loss of life yet a rumour of her using skin lightening creams to look lighter than her usual skin tone and that she wears a wig she found time to respond as was carried on Television Jamaica, TVJ last Saturday night. Her response to many of her critics was she was all about work, work, work and that she was busy working and her husband advised her to ignore detractors. How a Prime Minister does finds time to address a salacious rumour as that while the country is in a mess? Why would a Prime Minister be detained with mundane matters such as those? More cracks in the ranks seem apparent as the Education Minister Ronnie Thwaites and his recent rant on not allowing homosexual family life to be taught in school with the return of the sanitised and previously withdrawn Health and Family Life, HFLE manual, many are asking if he is on a frolic of his own while the Prime Minister is deafeningly silent with no mention from her office despite the public spat between the Ministry and the powerful (indeed PNP friendly) Jamaica Teachers’ Association, JTA and some in its leadership.

Actions such as that that she is presently displaying is undermining her premiership and yet one of her own powerful leaders under her watch differs on the conscience vote route as outlined by her which suggests something is not right somewhere, dissent in the ranks maybe and the silence on this statement in the media is puzzling. Is she under pressure within the party (apart from diplomatic shuffling) as it is not usual to see a General Secretary of the party diametrically opposed to what was suggested and promised by the leader? Let us watch this one. It is a worrying trend these outbursts by our Prime Minister and seeming posturing of her cabinet. Another disturbing development is the supposed call by anti gay activist Betty Ann Blaine under behind her children’s organization Hear The Children’s Cry to release the old Ambassador Peter King tapes surrounding his murder case and allegations of popular persons on those tapes in same sex orgies. Some talk show hosts have taken that call and attached a homo-paedophile construct to that implying that men of upstanding status are sodomizing boys in their homes. While there may be paedophiles in our society overall to use this old case to further push the anti gay agenda while erroneously conflating same gender sex with abuse. Jerry Small of Newstalk 93FM is one such talk show host who has repeated this construct and also added the murdered Russian Ambassador who was also at the scene that night he concludes a cover up was done to hide the men’s secret activities. I am not surprised that the Peter King matter would have returned as a basis to substantiate the homo-negative position. He accuses the Russian diplomatic core of covering this death as the men were abusing boys at the Jamaican ambassador’s home and thus the reason why he was murdered. The case as I remember it had adults and the accused was sentenced and is serving time, during the court case the gay panic defense was used to justify the reason for the accused actions (as typical in cases as this) and the testimony and evidence presented did not suggest or prove that young boys were at the home at that time or anytime or any other homo-paedophile activity. Furthermore persons I am familiar with who would congregate at the avenue sometimes such as displaced or homeless MSM have said the late Ambassador King was very strict when it came to boys around him and was a disciplinarian yet aspersions are cast on a dead man with very little way to prove or disprove them.

We do not know if any such sex tapes exist and if (a big if) he was involved in any such activity with under aged persons which I doubt I condemn it but the man is dead what would that serve now; bearing in mind laws already exist to protect children and the remedies exists to see them through any such despicable acts done to them if true. One thing we must always remember abuse is abuse despite the gender of the offender, their sexual orientation is immaterial as sexual attraction to children is a diagnosable disorder with the necessary pharmacological and psychological courses to address paedophilia or such deviations however homosexuality cannot be addressed in a similar fashion. 

also see: The Anti Gay march at Heroes Circle HERE and Betty Ann Blaine’s arrant nonsense request of Peter King Tapes

also see CVM TV's coverage on the matter to which abortion is pinged, please watch in its entirety:

Peace and tolerance

H

Church boots usher after alleged gay sex

A male usher from a Clarendon church was fired from his job and booted from the church recently, after he was reportedly caught having sex with another man at his work place, THE STAR understands.

The usher was fired more than two weeks ago but was unceremoniously dismissed from the church two Sundays ago, after turning up for divine worship.

Reports reaching THE STAR are that the usher, who also sings on the choir, joined the church two years ago from another congregation, some of whose members had suspected him of having homosexual tendencies. Failure to define 'homosexual tendencies' is telling but I suspect they meant effeminate behaviours which is the marker used by many to profile persons or their perceived sexuality.

He was reportedly caught by his boss recently with one of his co-workers having sex in a bathroom, if so was the other party also booted and if not why not? Would not some engagement with the men suffice in order to offer compassion while using the incident as a learning experience.

It was learnt that his boss made an alarm and other workers in the establishment decided that they were not going to work with both men again, as they felt uncomfortable having them around. This forced their boss to dismiss the two with immediate effect.

THE STAR understands that the boss got word to the leadership of the church informing them of the homosexual act, as well as informing them that he was fired. Word is that the usher turned up for ushering duties on Sunday but was told not to work as his service was no longer required.

It is also learnt that a church members meeting was called and a letter was read out to the usher informing him of the report from his boss and that he was no longer a member of the congregation, as no one with homosexual tendencies can be allowed to be a member of the church. Again I ask what are homosexual tendencies of the Star News who made the report?

Word has since spread in the community where the church is located that the former usher was sent packing from the church because of his homosexual act. I imagine the man or men have had to relocate as such finger pointing and knowledge can translate into violence rather quickly or a surprise mobbing seeing gay men are seen as weak and unable to physically defend themselves.

The continued insensitivity of the church is telling and intolerance is just unacceptable indeed.

Peace & tolerance

H

Cops allegedly shaking down homosexuals case again

Following a probe at the anti corruption branch of the security forces three police officers will face the Spanish Town court in St Catherine on June 18, 2013 after they were accused of shaking down two homosexual men who were allegedly caught in a compromising position in a car in bushes off the Hellshire main Road. In January the three police officers allegedly demanded five hundred thousand dollars not to press charges against the men; seventeen thousand was paid over the them but unbeknownst to them they were recorded by one of the men during the forced negotiations and handed over the materials to investigators, the cops are Special Corporal Tyrone Harvey, Lamore Small (Constable) and Lorraine Williams (Constable) are charged with soliciting money. The story has subsequently gotten mainstream coverage as well and some discussion came of it in light of the new probing body in the security realms to include using lie detectors and other methods to scrutinise their members and disciplinary actions where needed prior to any public actions.

The problem is cases like this generally tend to start off well but fizzle as they drag out in the courts and persons get frustrated so the case closes due to lack of prosecution, it is time consuming to be going to court when especially the back log of cases thus delaying justice even for what seems the simplest of matters. This is definitely not the first time I have seen this problem of shake downs of perceived homosexuals whether found in a compromising position or not and sometimes outright lies are told on persons or the story is embellished so asto hike the financial demand. The fear by supposed victims of having a serious charge of buggery hanging over ones head added to that are the possibility of violence, family rejection and more serious outcomes once said charge is made public forces many persons to unfortunately enter into these clandestine arrangements.

I too was approached in my buggery case alongside my three other charges back in November 1996 first by phone then by face to face meetings by persons seem to be cops who knew of or were close to the case as it moved through the system. Even when we were taken around to several police stations on the morning in question after we were picked up and a story fabricated that we were in a compromising position when all we were doing was loitering unfortunately by the ocean side yet condoms were found to be used as exhibits and so on. The would be extortionists wanted at the time four hundred thousand in other words one hundred thousand each as it was four of us and promises were made that the file could be made to disappear, another set of figures were banded about to go as far as to make the matter disappear from our police records as well but we stoutly resisted such attempts as we knew we were not guilty and our lawyer (not told of this at the time) said we had a strong case to get off the malicious charges. We were just in the wrong place that early morning and we paid the price for it. The case lasted over three years and was finally adjourned sine die with no new evidence by the prosecution as is the rule for such adjournments to reactivate the case. We have all since moved on with our lives and here I am today an advocate a product of an unjust system towards homosexual males in particular.

Most cases of buggery involving consenting adults caught in the act whether penetration is properly proven or not via the all important doctor’s report I learnt years later following my own experience hardly ever go to full trial or lead to a conviction as the precedent set is that of instances involving and older perpetrator and a younger victim in other words same sex paedohphilia which does not imply the sexual orientation of the alleged perpetrator, some rouge cops and corrupt persons in the systems know this and hence target some persons with such matters in shakedowns and offers of making files and documents disappearing.

Other community members over the years have been the “victims” of the practice back in the days and even recent reports suggest that at LGBT events cops have targeted persons for all kinds of reasons including suspected illegal activity and hence huge sums are allegedly demanded for protection or non pursuance by them to take legal steps for arrests or detention. Cops also target the parties as well every now and again and wait until the sessions end then set up roadblocks for no apparent reasons while pretending to search vehicles then cutely worded approaches are made to demand money, also under the guise of the night noise act have been used as well where even in geographical zones cops turn up to turn off parties sometimes well before the 2am deadline and when promoters try to negotiate leniency a sum is neatly requested where some promoters do pay while others stand their ground, I have had my equipment seized (as a DJ) in this dishonest practice under pain of arrest and exposure but we stood our ground and in one instance got the higher ups involved. Playing on the community due to the fear and avoidance of shame where matters are extremely public is just disturbing and shows the lengths some members of the force will go and bring the authorities into disrepute and losing credibility.

Other supposed male position compromisers caught in the outdoors also have had demands made of them and indeed the mainstream has its fair share of these accusations against rouge cops case in point the current public trial of a business man, opposition Jamaica Labour Party, JLP stalwart Daryl Vaz and famed decorated policeman Superintendent James Forbes whose reputation has taken a beating since the news first broke of a traffic charge bribe and attempted coverup by all named, the presence of two or three statements by another police officer involved in the issue has also raised eyebrows thus far and many are waiting for Supt Forbes side of the story, for now we are told via media reports of the trial that two thousand dollars was offered clandestinely to the officer who was ticketing the businessman involved but he eventually refused the bribe to make the ticket production stop however the politician and the Superintendent were made to get involved to apparently make the officer cower in taking action.

There was a case also of a shakedown that went bad some ten plus years ago as well where the accused officer employed threatening means with his cronies including targeting the family of the young man who was this time allegedly involved in same sex activities at his rented flat where neighbours called the cops to supposedly stop the practice. All the more reasons why the buggery law needs amending via decriminalization in my view as although the practice has not produced such “legal break-ins” the possibility still exists for just a phone call to cause such intrusion on private property; even crossing the threshold of one’s domain without a search warrant for that matter as has happened in Jamaica overall for many years. The case also in Montego Bay some years ago too where the men were removed from their domicile and paraded in full nude by foot to the police station while members of the public jeered them to their shame and embarrassment.

The infamous transgender case in Bayside Portmore some years ago is also a stark reminder of the practice as well where a pre-operative male to female transwoman who was stopped by cops after they suspecting suspicious activity in bushes as well with another male and a similar shakedown was allegedly carried out but upon realising the transwoman had breasts things took a turn and an attempted outing was done in public; due to the profile of the transwoman in terms of her high end vehicle and so on as those trappings play a key role in how cops approach persons as well the demanded amount was said to be high, she refused the advance by the cops and was charged and made station bail, the case went to court and the attempted extortion was made known in the short trial, she was eventually acquitted and walked free as the charges could not stick since the other party was not held or found in the matter. Also the awful police raid in Montego Bay at a former LGBT nightclub as well comes to mind, see more HERE.

Some attempt will be made to try and track this latest story since it has become so public and see where the courts take it and if the men will be also eventually charged for anything seeing the cops initial action has been compromised by their own alleged corrupt act.

Peace and tolerance

H

UPDATE September 14, 2013

Three Portmore police personnel charged with corruption will have their cases mentioned again on October 29.

They are Constables Grace-Ann Williams and Lamore Small and Special Corporal Tyrone Harvey.

When the matter came up in the Spanish Town Resident Magistrate's Court on Tuesday, the court was told that a call data report was still outstanding.

Resident Magistrate Marcia Dunbar-Green said that personnel from the Communications Forensic Cybercrime Unit should subpoenaed.

Caught in a 'strange' act

Allegations are that in February this year, the three cops saw a car parked along the Hellshire main road in bushes. Upon investigating, they reportedly saw two men in the vehicle in a very 'strange' position.

The court heard that the cops allegedly asked the men for $500,000 if they did not want to be taken into custody and charged.

The court further heard that the complainants were taken to an ATM machine and money was withdrawn. A sum was paid over to the accused cops.

The matter was reported to the police Anti-Corruption Branch. A file was compiled and sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions, who ruled that the three be charged with breaches of the Corruption Prevention Act.

European Parliament consents to EU-ACP partnership with reservations on missing sexual orientation discrimination clauses

Let's back track a bit in previous posts; in March 2010 we saw the African Caribbean and Pacific states refusing to include any remote look of gay rights in the agreement, then the 2nd revision in June it was again excluded. In November 2010 the ACP issued a declaration "To refrain from any attempts to impose its values which are not freely shared"

Fast forward to November 2011 in the revision for 2007 - 2013 the ACP still held out on any form of LGBT rights or discrimination due to sexual orientation. Now ............

Last week the European Parliament gave its legal consent to the updated Cotonou Agreement, a multilateral treaty between the EU and African, Caribbean and Pacific states. The Parliament expressed strong reservations about human rights in relation to sexual orientation.

Michael Cashman and Michèle Striffler MEPs

The Cotonou Agreement governs diplomatic, trade and aid relationships between the EU and 79 African, Caribbean and Pacific states.

The treaty was last amended in 2010, and all EU and ACP Member States must now ratify it, and the European Parliament consent to it.

Article 8.4 of the revised Cotonou Agreement newly foresees including “political issues of mutual concern or of general significance” in joint talks, including “discrimination of any kind”.

It reads as follows:

8.4. The dialogue shall focus, inter alia, on specific political issues of mutual concern or of general significance for the attainment of the objectives of this Agreement, such as the arms trade, excessive military expenditure, drugs, organised crime or child labour, or discrimination of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status. The dialogue shall also encompass a regular assessment of the developments concerning the respect for human rights, democratic principles, the rule of law and good governance. 

But the new list of grounds fails to mention sexual orientation, something the European Parliament had demanded.

In a resolution adopted Thursday, the European Parliament gave its legal consent to the amended treaty, but expressed “its strongest reservations about parts of the Agreement which do not reflect the position of the European Parliament and the values of the Union”.

The Parliament “urge[d] all parties to revise the unsatisfactory clauses” in the update due in 2015, ”including the explicit introduction of non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation”.

32.  Calls for negotiations to reinforce the principle of non-negotiable human rights clauses and sanctions for failure to respect such clauses, inter alia with regard to discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age, sexual orientation and towards people living with HIV/AIDS;

Michael Cashman MEP, Rapporteur for the European Parliament on the subject, explained: “The article on political dialogue wasn’t reworded in accordance with the Parliament’s wishes. The ACP side opposed including sexual orientation in the treaty, which is worrying since 38 ACP states still criminalize homosexuality.”

“The European Commission must now use the next two years before the third revision of the text to make progress on this crucial point.”

Michèle Striffler MEP, Shadow Rapporteur for the EPP group and a member of the LGBT Intergroup, added: “Non-discrimination is absolutely essential to our relationship with ACP countries, including on grounds of sexual orientation. Recent arrests and homophobic laws in Nigeria, Cameroon or Uganda show once again that we cannot make any compromise in this regard.”

Church defends Buggery Law ................

A legal show down is looming between a gay Jamaican man Javed Jaghai and several of the island's church groups, over the constitutionality of the sodomy law in Jamaica.

Lawyers representing a group of Christians - Christians United for Truth and Justice, filed an application before the Supreme Court on Friday seeking to join in the action filed by gay rights activist, Javed.

Another group comprising Christian attorneys - Lawyers Christian Fellowship, recently filed an application to join in the proceeding.

The Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, has also filed an application to join, as various interest groups are strongly opposed to moves to strike down the law - jostle to enter the matter.

Jaghai filed his claim on February 7, in which he contends that the section of the Offences Against the Person Act which deals with buggery, is unconstitutional as it criminalises sexual relations between adult males.

He maintains that under the constitution he has the right to privacy which entitles him to express his sexual identity.

However, in its application, Christians United said the law is constitutional and should not be struck down

The other opposing parties also argued that the anti-sodomy law is valid and constitutional and should remain in place.

The competing parties will get a chance to make their case as to why they should be heard in the matter, when the court sits on June 25.

Gay rights groups locally and in the United States are keeping a close watch on the case as it is the first time that the constitutionality of the anti-sodomy law is being challenged in Jamaica.

Jaghai says that he decided to challenge the constitutionality of the law after he was kicked out of his house because of his sexual orientation.

The hearing on June 25 was expected to be purely procedural: to settle such matters as the trial date and what forms of evidence would be admitted. However, the religious group Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society (JCHS) has since applied to be joined as interested parties in the claim, on the ground that, inter alia, decriminalization of sodomy would adversely affect the freedom of religion of Jamaican Christians who would no longer be able condemn homosexuality as a sin. 

This argument is, of course, patently silly says lawyer Maurice Tomlinson whose tolerance ad challenge is being deliberated in the Constitutional Court. Christians can and do preach that many acts, such as adultery and pre-marital sex, are immoral, even though those activities have been legal for decades. Another expressed concern of the JCHS is that churches will be forced to perform same-sex marriages. Not only is this highly speculative and irrelevant to this claim, but the fact is that Anglican and Catholic churches do not perform marriages for divorced persons as that runs counter to their faith traditions. Similarly, in jurisdictions that have recognized marriage equality, churches are allowed to decide if/when they wish to celebrate same-sex unions.

The full reasons the JCHS provides for opposing the decriminalization of sodomy are listed below:

1) Homosexual activities would be facilitated and encouraged;

2) It will not be long before marriages between two persons of the same sex will be facilitated, encouraged and adopted;

3) The public promotion of the homosexual lifestyle will be permitted;

4) The right to freedom of expression, to freedom of thought, conscience, and belief will be adversely affected;

5) The right to seek, receive distribute or disseminate information, opinions, and ideas through any media will be adversely affected;

6) The right to equality before the law will be adversely affected;

7) The right to enjoy a healthy environment will be adversely affected;

8) The right to respect for and protection of private and family life, and privacy of the home, will be adversely affected;

9) The protection of privacy of communication will be adversely affected;

10) The right to manifest and propagate religion in worship, teaching, practice, and observance will be adversely affected;

11) The right to freedom from discrimination on the ground of religion will be adversely affected.

Javed's team fully intend to resist the application of the JCHS to be joined to this suit, as we find their arguments spurious and a waste of the court’s time. We also feel that the Attorney General’s Chambers can and should be able to adequately represent their interest. After all, the Solicitor General, who heads the AG’s Chambers, is a high-ranking member of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship, one of the groups that founded the JCHS.

It is also clear that the JCHS does not represent the views of many Christians when it comes to the issue of decriminalization of sodomy. They certainly don’t represent the views of the island’s most established churches: the Anglican and Roman Catholic.

The Rt. Rev. Dr. Howard Gregory, Anglican bishop of Jamaica. (Photo courtesy of the Jamaica Gleaner)

Appearing on the popular Jamaican radio programme “Beyond the Headlines” on April 26, 2013, the Anglican Lord Bishop of Jamaica and the Cayman Islands, the. Rt. Rev. Dr. Howard Gregory, stated that the country’s 1864 British colonially imposed anti-buggery law should be repealed.

This statement is in line with one made by the spiritual head of the Anglican Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Justin Welby during the June 3 same-sex marriage debate in the UK House of Lords. While maintaining the church’s opposition to marriage equality, Archbishop Welby said:

“…It is also absolutely true that the church has often not served the LGBT communities in the way it should. I express my sadness and sorrow for that considerable failure. There have been notable exceptions, such as my predecessor, the late Archbishop Ramsey, who vigorously supported decriminalization in the 1960s. It is also necessary to express, as has been done already, total rejection of homophobic language, which is wrong and, more than that, sickening.”

The war of words has heated up in print and electronic media as of late even as the tolerance ad case deliberations continue by the judges who heard the matter in the constitutional court.

The Buggery review is now an official promise from the government but a date is not set for that activity. 

meanwhile JFLAG ans their supporters have tried to simplify what they require as it is no longer a full repeal but decriminalization of buggery.

see: JFLAG Position Statement on Upcoming Conscience Vote

Interesting times lie ahead but we must stay on course with these and the other developments myself and others are trying to carefully track.

also see:

Dr Wayne West’s continued intellectual dishonesty ...

Tolerance Ad case the Final Day – Tomlinson v TVJ,CVM TV & PBCJ

The False Dichotomy of the religious right on the ………

Espeut, West says “Homophobia” was invented to abuse Christians as hate speech
‘Gays Made, Not Born’ – On the Confused State of the Religious Mind

Some religious right lies about the lgbt community…

Don’t Shield Gays From Criticism

Church Stands Resolute Against Buggery Backers says Al Miller ………… Love March Movement Lacks Moral Compass says LGBT voice

Rev Al Miller on the Abnormality of Homosexuality & the invented gay marriage rights ploy

Rev Al Miller says gay lobby is using the guise of tolerance to get the nation to accept the “gay lifestyle”

Rev Al Miller - the gay lobby is not asking for buggery decriminalization because of discrimination but to force homosexuality on the nation .......

'We Have The Numbers' - Anti-Homosexuality Church position to block buggery amendment

also see: Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, JCHS continued confusion of paedophilia & consenting homosexuality.

JCHS recent ad 

Following the Jamaica Society for a Healthy Society’s recent public relations campaign with an HIV is a gay disease tinge is discussed on Nationwide Radio hosted by the not so tolerant George Davis, the illogical posturings by Mr West and his team is exposed by Mrs Carol Narcisse public commentator.

George Davis Live - Dr Wayne West & Carole Narcisse on JCHS' illogical fear

also

And to think in the middle of the debate comes a tabloid story of a deacon and pastor caught in a compromising position at a church of all places, the walls of which hide many struggling with their sexuality yet intolerance prevails. When can we begin to realize that persons ought to be allowed to live their truths to stop all this madness? The straight spouse discussion that was recently awakened is also ongoing as I was contacted by the founder of such a counseling group located in Florida following my post on sister blog GLBTQJA: The Unofficial Practice of using Marriage to cure Homosexuality

Peace and tolerance

H

more reading:

Christians who believe in ignorance and that all others are wrong but they are right