Church silent as pastor hit with buggery charge says Star

In a follow up to a previous post on sister blog GLBTQ Jamaica a pastor was accused of buggery of a fifteen year old boy the 'church' has been accused of silence in a hypocritical sense. In the previous report I posted:

A 27 year old pastor of the New Testament Church of God in Bonkers Hill Trelawny has been relieved of duties after he was charged with sexual assault & buggery of a minor being a fifteen year old boy. Percy Smith has been slapped with buggery, gross indecency and grievous bodily harm, the acts allegedly occurred between 2016 to earlier this year. In a press release yesterday the Administrative Bishop of the church Reverend Wellesley Blair confirmed that Smith was removed from conducting anymore pastoral duties, he said the church disassociates itself from immoral, unlawful or reprehensible acts unbecoming of a pastor; he said the church is willing to cooperate with the investigators in whatever appropriate or is necessary and that the church is also expressing sympathy to the family affected, the accused pastor is to face the court sometime this week.

I hope that the youngster is being properly counselled and engaged towards some recovery, also I hope the court systems are taking into account the sensitivities involved and that the matter is tried ‘in camera’ (the accused and the victim) so as to avoid any unneeded exposure. The repeated mention dates and or preliminary hearings can be daunting for the victims in particular, to be asked to go to court to face the evil one or made to relive the matter.

I can only imagine the state of affairs in that household and by extension the rest of the church community and the condemnation on their part of the accused pastor seeing it is same gender sex matter, I raise that because of the justification of an ongoing matter of the Moravian pastor who was accused of assault of a fifteen year old girl. Many commentated openly that nothing was wrong with ‘a little sex’ and after all she is a girl and the accused pastor in that matter should be forgiven; the efforts by some who ought to know better to seemingly protect that pastor only threw salt in the wound and has left me wondering what other dark secrets ad out there that church boards are aware of but cover them up so as not to ruffle feathers. Apparently hetero-paedophile appearing abuse cases can or should be allowed some leeway because it the accepted straight sex but mention a male and all hell break loose. Comments made by overly fanatically sympathetic congregants and others that the Moravian pastor blasting those who accused them shows up the kinds of control some have over those who are easily led. (more HERE)

ENDS

But the Jamaica Star's Western Bureau reported:

Superintendent Clive Blair, who heads the Trelawny Police

The New Testament Church of God in Bunkers Hill, Trelawny, was clearly not a happy place on Sunday. While members were out in their numbers for morning service, it was quite obvious that the recent arrest of their leader, Pastor Presley Smith, had dampened their spirits.

The 27-year-old Smith was arrested last Friday, accused of grievous sexual assault, buggery and gross indecency against a 15-year-old boy, who is said to be a member of his congregation.

According to a member of the community, Smith recently baptised the young man he is now accused of molesting.

When the WESTERN STAR tried to get a comment from a member of Smith's congregation about the very serious charges against him, she turned her face away, started humming a song and quickened her steps. Other church members took a similar stance, refusing to discuss the matter.

Superintendent Clive Blair, the commanding officer for the Trelawny police, said Smith's arrest came after the matter was thoroughly investigated.

"Our understanding is that the alleged offences were committed over a period of time on a 15-year-old student of one of the high schools in the parish," Blair said.

When the WESTERN STAR reached out to Bishop Lloyd Lawrence, president of the Trelawny Ministers Fraternal, he said: "Before you go any further, I have no comment."

ENDS

I was not expecting the 'church' to quickly hit out at this given the collective position they have taken on the buggery law and implying a homo-paedophile construct to bolster their antigay position. Now that one of their own is caught in the very sexual abuse phenomenon what can they say, effectively not much. It would be interesting find out if the church would be so forgiving to welcome the accused pastor to the fold or either suggest reparative therapy or other psycho-sexual interventions. The matter is to heard in court soon.

Peace & tolerance

H

Annie Paul | How To Thwart The Gay Agenda

So blogger Annie Paul did this one, also see my previous entry on sister blog HERE, meanwhile Miss Paul did a relatively good job, frankly the folks at JCHS are just paranoid.

You are the head of a self-appointed coalition to foster a 'healthy society' in Jamaica. You are also a medical doctor. Or you are the head of an assembly of churches, a reverend. No, not one of those going around molesting young girls. No, no, not one of those. You are both dedicated to the policing of gender boundaries in Jamaica. Men are men and women are women, and there shall be nothing betwixt or between.

You are duty-bound to police the borders of Jamaica against interlopers and unwanted immigrants. Why, even Donald Trump is taking a leaf out of your book! Those who ignore or show lack of respect for gender boundaries are not welcome in Jamaica. It is your solemn duty to make this clear to every citizen. You have to be particularly vigilant against the gay agenda, a global conspiracy involving institutions at the highest levels - the United Nations, the World Bank, the European Union whose goal is to destroy the world (and, inter alia, the Jamaican family) by legalising gay marriage.

If, God forbid, gay marriage is legalised in Jamaica, it will be the beginning of the end. For all and sundry will take up with their own gender, setting up same-sex households all over the country, and soon procreation will grind to a halt. There are no examples, as yet, of this happening in countries where gay marriage has been legalised, but so what? Reality is not a shackle. Keep stressing the following point. How can we have a healthy society without children?

As for feminists. They, too, must be kept from invading Jamaica, where we like to do things in old, time-honoured ways. It is a pity that slavery was officially abolished two centuries ago. What is wrong with slavery? Nothing at all. Slaves are essential to healthy families. Women are meant to cook, clean, raise children, and provide sex for heads of households at no pay. Also, the sex part is non-negotiable, women must deliver when the subject is broached. Shop must remain open 24/7. Think open access is a new sumpn?

It's just that slavery must be gender-based. This is why it's so important to distinguish between the sexes. There can be no ambiguity about this. Men and women who break these rules must be enslaved by our cultural rules. Either they conform to these or they leave. It is for the benefit of the nation. Our good name is at stake.

Defining Rape

Also, it is to be noted that rape is a crime that can only be inflicted on women, for Jamaican law defines sexual intercourse under the Sexual Offences Act as "penetration of the vagina of one person by the penis of another person". Rape occurs when there is sexual intercourse without the consent of the woman. That is, for rape to happen, there has to be penetration of a vagina. By a penis. If a man buggers a boy or man, that is not rape. If a man thrusts his penis into your daughter's mouth without her consent, that is not rape either. Nor is penetration of one's orifices, vaginal or not, by the forced intrusion of an object, considered rape.

This actually means that homosexual men who bugger other men or boys get away with a lesser charge of grievous sexual assault, with much milder punishment compared to rape, but so what? "Anal penetration is wrong in 2017 and anal penetration will still be wrong in the year 3000."

We can't let ourselves be fooled by such tactics. Sometimes the truth is inconvenient, but let that not stand in your way. Redefinition of rape is a Trojan horse to bring in gay marriage. The gay agenda must be stopped at all costs. It's the al-Qaida of the God-fearing world, the ISIS of virtuous, law-abiding countries such as Jamaica.

What about all those women who keep turning up murdered, you ask? Like the one in the barrel in St Thomas? Ignore them, man. More than likely, they were asking for it. It's just the work of feminists. That is why we have to oust them, too. There is too much sensationalising of crimes against women, the media gives them too much space. "Men die every day. Boys are molested and sexually assaulted in every community. But what? No one cries out, protests, chastises Government or prays about it. Male lives matter, too."

Hat tip to the brilliant Nigerian satirist, Elnathan John.

- Annie Paul is a writer and critic based at the University of the West Indies and author of the blog, Active Voice (anniepaul.net). Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com or tweet @anniepaul.

Gays seeking comfort in church?

Is that really so though according to a recent discussion, when it is the same 'church' who condemns us whilst forgetting that Christ came to meet with the outcasts, downtrodden and poor; or it is shame as instilled by the church that persons cannot come to accept themselves as who they are and seek the church or God to address the guilt and shame. 

Here we are again this old familiar place even when in 2016 some fanatics and religious extremists suggested that JFLAG etc should go and deal with our homeless but as I said before the old adage rings true 'liberty comes through carelessness' this latest development comes through even as more tokenism still obtains as meaningful interventions. see: NPTAJ And Anti-Gay Groups Want J-FLAG Kept Out Of Schools & deal with homelessness

Yet these church groups forget or nicely overlook the clerical abuse matters so much so that they are so overbearing now it's now that they are speaking out, talk about hypocrisy.

For many years, Christians in Jamaica have condemned homosexuals and other members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community.

Their condemnations have left many members of this group feeling confused about their religious beliefs, but policy and advocacy manager of The Jamaica Forum of Lesbians, All-Sexuals and Gays (JFLAG), Glenroy Murray, believes that the condemnation is based on a misinterpretation of the scriptures and the belief that a person cannot be gay and Christian is false.

"The idea that someone cannot be LGBT and be Christian is false because there is nothing in the Bible that speaks to that," Murray said.

He, however, admitted that the Bible does make reference to homosexuality. Leviticus 20 verse 13 states that "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them".

Murray said that "was Mosaic laws, which were created specifically for the Jews."

No longer apply

"It was about strengthening their armies and keeping their civilisation together and because we know that when Jesus came the Mosaic rules no longer applied - not to the Gentiles at least - and since most of us aren't Jews, we can't use Leviticus to say homosexuals can't be Christians."

According to Murray, most homosexuals in Jamaica are Christians, and like other Christians who are committing sins, they have found a way to reconcile what they do with their beliefs. It would be good for Murray to prove that especially in recent years when so many of his colleagues came out as atheists. If the church is so opposed to homosexuality then many would not go to church in the first place, sometimes I wonder if some of us think carefully before we speak to media.

The Reverend Herro Blair Jr, while still declaring that homosexuality is a sin, said that homosexuals should be welcomed in the church and their sins shouldn't be treated differently from other sins.

"I would not stop a gay person from being a part of my church, and I cannot view the lifestyle any differently from how I would view a person who is fornicating or committing adultery," Blair Jr said.

Theological conservatives who believe the Bible forbids same-sex relationships have been opposed to gays being active members or leaders in the church.

Sadly the issue of sexual orientation is still seen as a 'lifestyle' by some clergy and theologians despite the plethora of information out there.

Peace & tolerance

H

So Rev Chisholm departs from his JCHS colleagues on the Phonebook kerfuffle

As I live and breathe I never thought I would see a departure by partner in crime to the antigay establishment of the Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, JCHS although he hardly names them in a letter to the Observer on the issue entitled "Yellow Pages teacup storm" also see my take on the issue on sister blog GLBTQ Jamaica "Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society gets worked up over a phonebook!"

The selectivity on issues by this one group supposedly in the name of a healthy society is so hypocritical it's not funny. But first let us see what the goodly Reverend had to say:

Dear Editor,

If you have a problem with the front cover of your copy of the current Jamaican Yellow Pages telephone directory (dancehall scene) why not just flip it over to the back cover (ska/rocksteady scene), or better still just tear off the flipping front cover.

This is a simple solution to a simple problem in my view. The cover is almost literally a flat (two-dimensional) cardboard photo and that disturbs or turns on some of us? Give me a break!

Now, though I am trained in music and philosophy, and have been a Christian for 49 years, I would not venture to do any kind of research at a live dancehall session because I personally could not “plead the blood of Jesus” fervently enough to keep all sections of my anatomy calm. Even then, my possible response to the visual stimuli in that setting would be essentially saying much more about me than about the gyrating female bodies I would be viewing.

Apropos this stimulus/response issue, two illustrations have been brought to my attention in recent months. One, squeeze a peeled orange as hard and as long as you can and you will never ever get lime juice from the effort. This is because of the internal make-up of orange which determines its response to squeezing. If a skimpily clad lady, or one who is not exactly small-breasted or of a small derriere, turns me on sexually that response is essentially because of my internal make-up.

The other illustration relates to grains of sand in an eye as opposed to in an oyster. Sand in an eye irritates and harms, but in an oyster a pearl is likely because the make-up of the eye does not allow for a response other than irritation/harm, whereas the make-up of the oyster leads to a pearl response.

Whether it is the sculpture at Emancipation Park, the current Yellow Pages ‘dancehall cover’, or whatever, let’s not forget or downplay the fact that our response to any given work of art may be more suggestive of the kind of person we are than about the aesthetico-moral calibre of the work of art.

Maybe I just need Jesus, but Church leaders need to revisit their definition (if they have one) and defence of what we regard as pornography.

This ‘controversy’ is really more like fomenting a category 5 storm in a thimble than a storm in a teacup. For the young and innocent, a thimble is a tiny sewing device.

Rev Clinton Chisholm
clintchis@yahoo.com

ENDS

one of the substitute covers

the cover that send some haywire

Wow the response is very direct and indirect as I hinted above but his point on the response to artwork is interesting though and is worth exploring to really see what he says makes sense. Meanwhile it was noticeable that Dr Wayne West the head of the JCHS made an appearance on Love 101FM's Moment of Hope show on Sunday morning last talking about HIV/AIDS and prevalence rates in teens while carefully staying clear of the Phonebook issue. Even his responses to the questions asked were markedly different as the usual combative style was not there.

Has something happened since this phonebook fiasco behind the scenes hence a change of strategy and Chisholm's public difference to the matter? a response most strange to me.

Yet to be seen if ever but duly noted.

Peace & tolerance

H

also see:

JCHS gets worked up over a phonebook and Leighton Levy's take: Nothing wrong with Yellow Pages cover

Levitical imperatives in the age of ‘grace’ instead of ‘law’ & the new covenant

I am certainly not any theologian but am sufficiently intimate with the materials concerning the teachings and tenets of Christ, careful listening and reading of others, books, blogs and including dissenting points of view from religious voices indeed fanatics. The Trump president elect win has curiously emboldened some persons claiming to be Christian despite the presumptive leader of the free world is on his third wife, thrives in the realms of uncertainty, racism, misogyny and seems lost in his gloating self glorification of the reality ‘The Apprentice’ but has forgotten his favourite line from the show “You’re fired!” Trump’s own appearing patronizing optics by way of rainbow flags during the campaign seems to fly in the face of decency and plays to a kind demagogic populism.

Such religious fanatics in the form of some evangelicals here in Jamaica outside of the US based Pat Roberts capitalist types who make the rest of the honest church body look stupid have been rejoicing with full open support by their congregants and blind followership’s loyalty. The recent news that Trump may appoint a leading LGBTQers has thrown a wrench in the mix; now some pastors are squirming in discomfort given the news as they thought it would be a simple route to theocracy.

In a previous post I spoke to the business of the convenient and deliberate misuse of Leviticus to enforce fear and hate sometimes from philosophers and theologians for convenient reductionist anti LGBTQ arguments, without any proper tangible or provable basis. In fact it amounts to intellectual dishonesty frankly. Populism by way of the Jamaica Labour Party, JLP for example and said crazed evangelicals who ignore for the most part societal ills but are dead focused on referendum for maintaining buggery laws while touting justification due to abominations listed in Leviticus; they ignore some of those same abominations that do not fit their agenda but emphasise same gender related matters but do not see others such as:

Eating shrimp, wearing clothes made from one or more fabrics, beard wearing men, adultery and the consumption of some cloven footed animals. At a discussion session at a Baptist church I was asked to offer some pointers on Leviticus coming from previous blog posts of mine and the business of male homosexuality in particular. I sought to bring the conversation not from condemnation which for the most part came from the panellists and audience members in an attempt to right size the thinking debunking some of the myths, misunderstandings and misguided othering of non Christians especially homosexuals. 

Despite the growing understanding of the holiness codes for the Hebrew people during the temporary time under Moses after, bear in mind in the KJV the preamble to the text itself is quite clear as it reads in part:

“The book of Leviticus accordingly is a manual for priests detailing the religious rules and procedures which the priests had to observe and enforce for the covenant nation of Israel. Its historical setting is the two years Israel spent encamped at Mount Sinai; it contains no further account of Israel’s journeys from Egypt to Canaan.”

It continues:

“The fact that Moses, the author of Leviticus devoted an entire book to priestly matters shows the importance that the religious observances were to have ever afterwards for the Israelites. Christians, under the terms of Christ’s new covenant do not regard these Levitical regulations as binding, but they do obey the same God, not in the letter of the law but in the spirit of Christ.”

Yet religious voices who make the rest of the body of Christ appear out of touch and paranoid continue to use the justification in their eyes that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of exclusively homosexuality when we know that is not so. Bearing in mind King James hundreds of years later in whose name the most popular English translation of the Bible in 1610 is in was actually bisexual even in the face of a buggery law; pity the goody King would not have foreseen the work put in would be used as a destructive weapon hundreds of years later against LGBT people. The book of course was published to keep its true historical authenticity to the source Hebrew scroll text and for purposes of continuity so I would not expect King James’ sexuality to have interfered as a reason to purge the finished work of any homosexual abomination reference.

We cannot also ignore the fact that Leviticus written by Moses as far as we know does not record the Egypt to Canaan phase of the journey of the Israelites; given the kinds of archaeological finds in the last hundreds of years to now despite present days Turkey and Syrian civil wars and conflicts that may delay more findings homosexual themed materials dating to those times have been unearthed which leaves the question as to what might have occurred then in as far as the movement of the nomadic Hebrew people then?

“Some of you think that homosexuality is a greater sin than malicekeeping.No way in the sight of God.” (Bishop Herro Blair, sermon on Television Jamaica (TVJ), 3 March 2003) - The declaration by Bishop Blair – who is a figure of some political and religious influence – that there is no substantive theological basis for the selective highlighting of homosexuality as the ‘sin of sins,’ and which is our epigraph here, is not one that is often publicly made in Jamaica. The overtly virulent expressive homophobia arguably encourages the documented tendency towards and the practice of physical brutality and violence against homosexuals. It is reinforced, even operationalized, by three other specific features of the Jamaican situation.

According to Cecil Gutzmore’s whose ‘Casting the First Stone’ writings some time ago, There is a crying need for effective political-theoretical engagement by those who consider themselves politically and culturally progressive with and against the apparently intractable homophobia of Jamaican society. Amongst those who have recently made such intellectual interventions is Tara Atluri (2001) who proposes that sexism, heterosexism and homophobia combine to make Jamaica, and other societies of the Caribbean region, into what she images as a ‘closet’ for our lesbian and gay fellow citizens.

The somewhat thin body of academic, intellectual and artistic work designed to break the silence about homosexuality in the Caribbean, to still the ‘noise’ of local anti homosexual ideologies and intellectually and politically to deconstruct homophobic practice (carried out largely in the geographically distant and socially remote pages of academic journals, in far-off published newspapers, and in radio programmes and films usually unheard and unseen by the majority in Jamaica) appears to have all but failed to impact in any major positive way on the situation. This is separate and apart from the academic and sometimes political ends that are quite definitely achieved.

The Christian Church with its fundamentalist doctrines, and the reggae-dancehall genre have pushed key influential feature in the exceptionality of Jamaican homophobia derives from Christian fundamentalist doctrine which finds constant outlets not just in churches, but in popular culture (in Christian radio and TV programmes), as well as in the rituals of many secular institutions. Primary imperatives are

(i) the religious fundamentalist anti-homosexuality imperative, and

(ii) the imperative of the ‘unnaturalness’ of homosexuality. The secondary imperatives, in some way derived from the primary imperatives, are

(iii) the imperative of the purity and authenticity of a primordially homosexuality-free global African culture,

(iv) the imperative to protect vulnerable youth from homosexuality, as conflated with paedophilia, and

(v) the imperative of the misplaced illegality of homosexuality. When it is buggery that is illegal.

In this discourse, homosexuality is constituted straightforwardly as a sin in the eyes of God and therefore also in the view of self-perceived good and/or godly persons. It is agreed that omniscient Jehovah repeatedly declares homosexuality to be a sin in both the Old and New Testaments and that the Almighty would neither misrecognize nor misname a physical and/or emotional illness as a condition of sin. The idea that homosexuality is an illness (whether congenital or otherwise) represents the negative reading of the claim that lesbian and gay persons generally had their sexuality determined at birth, and did not therefore usually exercise unfettered choice. Its positive version holds that a certain proportion, a minority, of God’s human creatures are indeed born lesbian/gay and that their sexuality is to be seen as being as much God-ordained/created as that of the heterosexual majority. However, it also holds that homosexuality must still be repressed or at least treated.

Reggae artistes are different from the deejays to the extent that fewer singers have composed songs directed against homosexuals/homosexuality and it is perhaps more difficult for the singer to address this issue by improvising in performance. Even so, the earliest directly homophobic reggae song is the 1978 in a kind of secular religiosity or Rastafarian non judo Christian subscription is King Sounds and the Israelites’ ‘Spend One Night Inna Babylon’. This song makes explicit mention of Sodom and Gomorrah and of the fact that these two ancient cities, along with Babylon and Rome, are anathematized in the Bible. King Sounds, then, is simply transferring onto modern ‘Babylon’ – as constituted in what Pollard (1994) has termed Rastafari ‘dread-talk’– the characteristic sin of Sodom. In the song King Sounds embellishes his catalogue of Babylonian abominations by adding to it bestiality. For those advancing the Christian fundamentalist imperative, the essential sin of homosexual behaviour (sodomy) is said to be forbidden by God, and is recognized as a sin so serious as to be punishable by death.

Blind ignorance has effectively led to the belief that homosexuality only came about in Sodom and that even homosexuality signs in numerous animal species existing well before homosaepian developmental trajectories are an anathema. Those fundamentalist Christians constantly forget the important biblical injunction that ‘judgement belongs unto God’.

It must be understood that the imperative under discussion is specifically derived from the fundamentalist reading of the Holy Bible: passages in Leviticus assert respectively: ‘Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is an abomination’ (emphasis added); and: ‘If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them’ (Leviticus 18: 22; 20: 13). Earlier in the Bible the seriousness of the punishment Jehovah deals out in connection with homosexuality is made very clear in the often mentioned story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. According to the narrative, these ancient locations were sites of this great perceived evil: ‘their sin [homosexuality] is very grievous’ (Genesis 18: 20). Jehovah accordingly decided to destroy these cities and their inhabitants, excluding the single godly family – that of Jehovah’s servant Lot.

The fundamentalists point to the fact that God, throughout His book, variously declares homosexuality to be an ‘abomination’ (Ezekiel 16: 50), a ‘vile affection’ (Romans 1: 26, 27), ‘unseemly’ (Romans 1: 27), ‘not natural’ (Romans 1: 26, 27), a form of ungodliness (Titus 2: 12). Of its practitioners, Paul it is said firmly that ‘God gave them up unto a reprobate mind’ (Romans 1:28). Some seem to forget Paul was offering an opinion to the early saints of the church spread across Greece in the most sexualised of all places, Corinth in response to the letters sent to him. Those who commit this great sin are thus unequivocally construed within the fundamentalist anti-homosexual ideological imperative as legitimate subjects to be punished by terminal violence, a fate not only dealt out directly by God Himself but, presumably, also by those regarding themselves as His faithful servants and the possible agents of His will. These persons feel a kind of righteous justification for, as it were, acting violently on God’s behalf against perceived homosexuals and homosexuality. This is what informs the output of artists such as King Sounds or The Wickerman, working almost twenty-five years apart within the Jamaican musical popular.

The selectivity of the fundamentalist imperative is evident in the response to the sin of adultery. For, on the evidence of the Holy Bible itself, the commandment against the sin of adultery can be seen to be of at least equivalent seriousness to the injunction against the sin of homosexuality. Why then, it might be asked, is it that Jehovah found no space amongst the remaining nine commandments given to Moses on Mount Sinai for one that explicitly forbids homosexuality, if this is correctly to be regarded as so fundamental and execrable a sin? The other sexually-related sin there mentioned forbids the coveting of one’s neighbour’s wife. But, depending of course on the sexuality involved, the also forbidden coveting of a neighbour’s man- and maid-servants not to mention that neighbour’s ox and ass may also be to sexual purposes.

Let us put to rest the silliness about “homosexual lifestyle” once and for all; as a phrase it is pure propaganda, a gossipy generalization and completely unworthy of a Christian who, following the counsel in Proverbs seeks understanding and insight into life and people. As Christians some will have to decide if we are going to partake of divisive “party spirit” that racked the church at Corinth or follow Christ as discerning attentive principles – to that still small voice and sharpen concerns for the ostracized instead of creating more strife.

Oh these modern day Pharisees, Sadducees and Scribes who think their correctness is the be all and end all. Frankly envy of the apparent freedom of LGBT people could be called ‘freedom envy’ in my view. The role of freedom envy in the anti LGBT crusade is confirmed by the repeated and emphatic reference to “the homosexual lifestyle.” This is left a vague generality, as though it were something everyone already understands. The so called “homosexual lifestyle” is associated with a US view of homosexuality and dates back to the HIV/AIDS epidemic and stories of bath houses in places such as San Francisco; hence folks like Dr Wayne West of JCHS uses it as well to medicalise gays in his antigay advocacy or the deceptive “HIV is a gay disease ploy.” There is no such thing as a ‘homosexual lifestyle’ just as there is no such thing as “heterosexual lifestyle” heterosexual live on a “lifestyle” continuum just as homosexuals do. The continuum includes people in decades long monogamous relationships, people who live in social isolation, people who in into bar scenes etc people who move from relationship to relationship.

When oh when is there also going to be a separation of sexual orientation from the automatic perceived link to buggery or anal sex? That abhorrence factor is the spoiler in these matters when discussed. We also seem to forget the buggery law as we ended up inheriting by way of our former colonial masters and a savings law clause was a legal instrument to discredit the Catholics in the extirpation exercise under King Henry VIII’s protestant reformation and royal supremacy in the 1500s. Lest we forget the very ‘King James Version’ the most successful English language translation was presided over by a bisexual being King James himself, not because of any correctness in the word/text but to quell the struggle between the puritans, the reformers (protestant) and established clergy (Catholics); “No Bishop, No King” the infamous words by James in his quest to preserve the hierarchy of the monarchy over the church of England.

The fact is we are not under law but are now under grace.

Peace & tolerance

H

also see:

Patois Bible waste of money ....  

Here is my podcast on that issue:

The use of Jamaican dialect to further stigmatize homosexuals in the new patois Bible

JAMAICAN RELIGIOUS COMMUNITY & THEOLOGIANS SCOFF AT THE “GAY BIBLE”  

More on ‘Can you be a gay Christian?’ or so minded

In a previous post (Impossible to be gay & Christian?) I had attempt to deal with this question using my own experiences despite being openly gay but so Christian minded and drawing on my time at Sunshine Cathedral Jamaica, SCJ, the usual responses that followed then included prayer being offered to me or for me to get reparative or restorative therapy suggestions to sheer condemnation and ‘fire bun’ as usual, as if that is to scare persons straight. While we believe God’s power is unexplainable I do not see where I would have been created in his image and gay he would want to ‘change’ me when I am what I am. Why would I simply choose something or sexual orientation that could land me in problems, especially when so many species of animals display homosexual characteristics? Why can’t I and other homosexuals be who we are without to confirm to a hetero-normative expectation in order to be seen as Christian? Sections of fanatics in the faith (or pretentiously so) are aggressively on an exclusionist advocacy in a bid to ‘normalise’ living even as the bigger issues for God’s work are forgiveness or inclusivity and winning souls for the kingdom no matter who or what or the condition that that soul may be in.

What explains the person who enters the church to escape so called dirty feelings based on ignorance and a lack of self acceptance?

The usual Levitical response is a feature when this question comes up with Sodom & Gomorrah as the justified reason for condemnation when it is well known that homosexuality in and of itself is not the reason why the city was said to be destroyed; while totally ignoring the fact that Leviticus were a set of holiness codes for temporary use for a particular people at a particular time in lieu of instructions and rules for Hebrews moving from repeated slavery and oppression towards freedom and the promise of a new life. A people and a culture where open displays of same gender love, coupled with the silence and near invisibility of women, who are often seen as just incubators for sperm and children one would expect some resistance to any other way of existence.

The zeal at which so called Christians go after homosexual(s)(ity) is still baffling to me yet the other societal atrocities they do not do so, even when they participate in symbolic protests on abuse of children and so on but are near silent when one of their own as men of the cloth fall down and even sexually abuse children or vulnerable church sisters and brothers sometimes.

The disturbing thing lately is the open support of erratic and divisive Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump by some Christian fanatics namely Dr Wayne West of Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, JCHS despite Trump himself tacitly support LGBT matters as he has relatives who are such. Groups and individuals are quite prepared to give their anti gay stance steam in the name of God while accepting implicitly racist stances, conservatism, underhandedness and a candidate who made disparaging remarks about women on tape, mocking persons with disabilities and one who while expressing blocking immigration is quite prepared to allegedly use undocumented immigrants as construction workers on his hotels’ construction in order to pay them less than market value yet this is the man some want to support!

A recent vox pop and discussion on the issue came up for mention and yet again the aforementioned expected responses came through.

LET’S face the facts — God’s love knows no bounds, and we are often told that Christ hates the sin and not the sinner. But when it comes to homosexuals, is there an exception to the rule? Can they rightfully proclaim that they are Christians, since Christ loves all?

It is often said that the litmus test with all things is scripture, and how one rightly interprets the word of God. As a result, scripture is clear that you cannot comfortably and habitually engage in sin and call yourself a Christian. This simply means that whether you are a fornicator, adulterer, homosexual, thief, liar, idolater — and the list goes on and on — it is still the same thing — sin.

Moreover, the Bible presents a lifelong marriage between a man and a woman as normal, and anything that deviates from that as reprobate. Two out of many passages of scripture see homosexual practices as a crime punishable by death — Leviticus 18:22 and 20:13. However, in the New Testament, Paul indicates that the Gospel provided salvation to homosexuals and other sinners so that they don’t practise it any more, but live a life pleasing to God.

According to Reverend Karl Johnson, general secretary of the Jamaica Baptist Union, the issue of homosexuality has become increasingly visible in our generation for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, acceptance of the practice by the media/movie/television industry; viewing the practice as a human rights issue and not a moral issue; legislative support by many countries and not just by the so-called ‘developed’ ones, and greater acceptance of the practice by some churches.

“All of the above has served to make a practice/behaviour/issue that was once viewed as taboo, vulgar, unnatural, abnormal by most societies, appear more acceptable. Clearly, from the above, the church, which is a part of society, and which is still seen by many as having the responsibility of being the ‘moral’ voice and authority, has contributed wittingly/unwittingly to both the increased visibility of the practice and the confusion/debate surrounding its acceptability,” Johnson said.

He said this background may be helpful in reflecting on the question of whether there can be a gay Christian or a Christian who is gay.

“Is the question an expedition of ‘oxymoronic’ proportions? With several biblical texts mired in debate over their meaning, for example, the Genesis 18/19 story of Sodom and Gomorrah; Leviticus 18’s pronouncement of death for those who practise such things; Paul’s words in Romans about ‘unnatural acts’, among others, I believe we have to develop an understanding of God’s intention for the relationship between the sexes. In doing so we have to tread carefully in selecting ‘proof texts’ and develop a wider understanding from the whole counsel of scripture,” Johnson explained.

He added: “Based on that, I submit that any attempt to portray homosexual activity and behaviour as normal and therefore as an acceptable equivalent of heterosexual activity and behaviour should be rejected. People with a homosexual orientation who profess the Christian faith should strive for celibacy, with complete dependence on the transforming, enabling and sufficient grace of God.”Johnson said perhaps the question should be rephrased, “Not... can there be a Christian who is gay, but can a professing Christian be a practising homosexual? And the answer is to let the jury decide.”

Below All Woman asked a few people whether they believe someone could be gay and proclaim themselves as a fellow believer.

Joshua:

I don’t think so. Many people like to say the love is universal and God loves everyone. He does, but what separates us is our sinful versus righteous living. If we are Christians we will go by the holy book, which is the Bible, and it specifically speaks about this. Even if we don’t want to look there, look at the animals. There is one male and one female. That’s the order of things. Sin is sin, they sin differently from a fornicator, but it’s still sin. So no, a homosexual, fornicator or anyone living in sin can’t be a Christian. You may believe in God, yes, but you can’t say you’re His follower if you’re going against what He teaches.

Ashley:

I’m agnostic, and I really think that people can identify religiously with whatever they feel, regardless of their lifestyle.

Chris:

Honestly, I’m God-fearing and I know the Bible says those who live a sinful life can’t enter God’s kingdom and the kingdom is for Christians. I know that homosexuality is not Christ-like, so no, you can’t be gay and be Christian.

Paula:

For me, coming completely out of a sinful life takes time. Today you accept Christ, tomorrow you won’t be perfect or even close to it. You take time to rid yourself of habits, but you consciously know that you can’t do certain things anymore. So if someone is gay and decides they want to be a Christian, I won’t judge them and say no, you aren’t. Temptations for that person will be greater. What matters is that they are taking steps to turn around their life. Saints are all sinners who fell down and got up.

Martin:

No. There is no explanation needed either. Same way if you see Jane stealing but is singing on the choir you’re going say she is no Christian, it’s the same way I’m going to look and say John who’s lying down with Tom is sullying God’s house.

We certainly have a long way to go on just basic understanding and misconstrued thoughts on what the teachings of Christ actually mean; which is definitely not exclusion, judgements and indeed selfishness. Paul’s own take on the issue of homosexuality is an opinion lest we forget whilst he and others were seeking to spread the church in new places, namely Corinth, a highly sexualised part of Rome at the time. A question I have often asked is according to Paul why would God give us over to sin when it is the very sin he was to redeem us from by way or his death and resurrection? I often reflect on this and await the answer(s) spiritually and otherwise. We must also not forget Paul himself by way of his writings has contradicted himself especially on women in the church and their leadership roles and voices obviously in the search and settling of the early movement as far as we know now, there are always new findings and writings out there, the recent 2000 year old papyrus that was found in the hands of thieves of precious artefacts which shows writings mentioning Jerusalem, I have no doubt that are lots of missing pieces out there.

In almost one breath Paul raises effectively to the peerage if you will the prophetess Julia for example who was also in Corinth and nearby areas teaching and leading the early church’s development, Paul encouraged persons to attend on her outfit but later the same Paul declares that women basically had no place in leadership and should remain silent for that matter. There is so much more to unpack on this but let us rest here for now.

More anon

Peace & tolerance

H

also see:

Slippery slope deception & conflation of incest with buggery’s decriminalization

No gay leaders in Jamaica's churches ......

Accident victim on flat bridge denies gay rumours

A policeman looks at the vehicle in which eight persons were travelling when it careened into the Rio Cobre last Saturday.

... Says funeral being planned for relatives in Rio Cobre crash, looks like it's gay rumours season again, oh boi what else is new now?

Family members of the Bishop Steven Ricketts, who died when his car plunged into the Rio Cobre on Saturday, have vowed to clear his name following a flood of allegations that he had a liking to young boys.

"I try not to read some of the things that people are saying because I don't see or know him as that kind of person, and I am always around him," a cousin of Ricketts told THE STAR last night.

"All of us are upset, angry and disgusted. Most of my family members don't want to hear or read anything about this," she said.

Bishop Ricketts and his two sons Shevaughnie and Sujay Ricketts were among six persons who died when his Suzuki Grand Vitara ran off the Flat Bridge and plunged into the Rio Cobre.

Eight persons were travelling in the vehicle which was said to be returning from a 'duppy catching' mission in St Thomas.

"All the persons who are talking bad things about Steven do not know him," the bishop's cousin added.

sexual favours

While stating that the claims that being made against the defenceless dead man are hurtful, she said that family is now focused on burying Steven and his two sons.

"We are just concentrating on the funeral of our three family members," she said.

Residents of Commodore, St Catherine, have alleged that the bishop would often give boys goods in exchange for sexual favours and that he was not afraid to hide his homosexual tendencies.

Ricketts was also the source of attention in a video on Facebook in which he beat a young man, an alleged boyfriend, with a cutlass.

Up to the point of his death, Ricketts was a defendant in a court case for burning a young man with hot water.

Bishop Ricketts was the head of the Mount Maria Zion Truth Fellowship Spiritual Church of God in Commodore. He was described by some community members as a man who loved to help people, and contributed to community development.

Hamlet Gordon-Simpson, a member of the church and close friend of Ricketts, attested to this.

"He was a people person, he's one Jamaica will miss. He was a Jamaica building person, community helper," she said.

Rest in peace although I did not know the man but the speeding on that bridge needs to go or more lighting on the strip itself, I use the thoroughfare every weekend nowadays and the crazy driving sometimes is ridiculous to say the least.

Peace & tolerance

H

Peter Espeut told to 'Don't Dress Up Homophobia As Science'

Peter Espeut the Catholic priest whose homophobia has been long in happening has been told in a letter in the Gleaner which I am total agreement, now that the pope has suggested that the church on a whole should apologise to homosexuals I wonder what he is going to come with in response; as his own church head has spoken and it maybe binding to all priests. 

from the Pontiff earlier this years and recent developments: Pope Francis reveals new church law to deal with paedophile priests and Christians should apologise to gay people — Pope Francis

Espeut has since shown more madness such as evidenced in previous posts: 

Espeut, West says “Homophobia” was invented to abuse Christians as hate speech and The False Dichotomy of the religious right on the LGBT advocacy Godlessness, also see: My answer to Peter Espeut's rubbish on Homophobia Exposed

now here is the letter in question:

THE EDITOR, Sir:

I just read Peter Espeut's article titled 'Sexual identity, gender identity' (The Gleaner, June 17, 2016) and, as a sociologist myself, wanted to edify him a bit. His views do not reflect the understanding of sex and gender among mainstream sociologists in any way, shape or form.

No half-decent sociologist believes that people are born 'male' or 'female' because of their chromosomes. That would equate (fe)maleness with a chromosome or sexual organ. I know that Espeut is a male, and I have never tested his chromosomes or seen his organs! It should be obvious from just that fact that 'maleness' is not based on those factors, but describes a series of social characteristics that we have been socialised to identify (shorter hair, more toned, less shapely, voice, etc., and, most of all, dress code!). I strongly encourage Espeut to read an article called 'Doing Gender' by West and Zimmerman.
Nonsense Argument

His argument that socialisation fails when a person who is supposedly born male identifies as a female is also nonsense to sociologists. We don't see people as failures because they do not fit into our traditional norms. A person who is a Christian in Iran is not a failure because he is in a small, rejected minority. Espeut should read Foucault's 'A History of Sexuality'.

Finally, the idea that this kind of 'post-modern subjectivism' is also wrong. Gender and sexual fluidity have been part of many cultures over history. Native Americans, for instance, recognised more than two genders. Here, 'How To Be Gay' by Halperin is a good book (it's not a manual on how to become gay, but a study of the history of gay culture).

Espeut is a homophobe. I've read enough of his stuff to know that. Rather than owning it, he's dressing up his religious intolerance in pseudo-scientific discourse. Not only are his views judgemental and reactionary to an oppressed group of people, they are also very wrong.

ANDRE STEPHENS
andrestephens@outlook.com 

ENDS

As I had pointed out in a previous post, In my own journey I do believe that one can be homosexual and Christian; I do not believe that God is caught up in judging us harshly by mere sexual orientation; after all we are more than just who we have sex with or are attracted to. I ask every now and again I refer to the woman with the alabaster box story or the stoning incident where I just quoted above the line Jesus used in terms of who is more holy than others. The raising of homosexuality as the worse sin above all others then the twinning if not combining of atheism/secularism as expressed by some LGBT persons as a false dichotomy to some anti-Christian, anti God position are simply just that, false dichotomies.

Jesus himself never spoke to homosexuality in a discriminatory fashion barring where Jesus in a teaching on the rapture makes what appears to be a neutral non-discriminatory reference where it read (King James Version):

also see:

Sociologist & RC Deacon Peter Espeut on The Right To Discriminate .... and a response

Spilling homosexual blood - Why do gay lovers kill each other so viciously?

Christians say ... Don't force gay agenda on them ........ lol

Church claims future victimization if buggery is decriminalized in Jamaica

A Response to a Gleaner Commentary: 'CAUSE' Editorials And The Culture War

Peace & tolerance

H

Suspected gay man booted from church ..... another case

Another case has come to hand which occurred in recent weeks, March 2016 to be precise of youth leader this time at a Pentecostal church in St Catherine. The matter also came up in an informal interfaith discussion as well where sexual orientation and the church were front and centre prior to the rainbow flag furor and since. In a previous post I had looked at a similar matter which occurred in May Pen Clarendon in 2015. The present matter as these matters often do has been building for some time in as far as profiling done by church elders with one particular church board member pursing the issue relentlessly it seemed. The impacted man was the subject of open and rumours, innuendo and speculation regarding his perceived sexual orientation; he was asked openly he said in a planning meeting for church activity after some allegations were supposedly made known to the person who asked the question; much to the shock of others in earshot of it.

also see: 

Church boots usher after alleged gay sex 2013

Booted from the Fellowship … said to be a homosexual ... Pastor's response is wanting 2011

He said he was shunned ever so slowly over time as the standoff was revealingly obvious; church members who would be very friendly and supportive of his leadership in the youth group are hardly speaking to him, and if they do it is very limited and formalised than before. Other rumours suggest that he was involved in some other action with another man who used to attend the church; the booted gay man is indeed same sex attracted and has borne the anti gay rhetoric in sermons, strong opposition to homosexuality in youth meetings especially in the height of the Professor Bain fiasco and subsequent antigay advocacy by groups such as Lovemarch, Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society, JCHS and Jamaica CAUSE. His church was also targeted in the campaign on a national church tour by one or more of the aforementioned groups. He participated as his obligations allowed but was also aware of his own sexuality and such. To have to hide who one is for so long must have been difficult; effectively living a lie in all places in the house of God and now to face this ostracism and out casting or othering.

The Sodom & Gomorrah story was often brought into the mix time and time again and he just got fed up of it; I have been evolving on this matter of Lot and his family’s exit from the city that was doomed for a long time, if we were to follow the teachings and warnings before. The real story to me is about the abuse of women as opposed to homosexuality as it conveniently used to justify the destruction of the city. The frame of reference tends to start at the angels visit to the city to clear it of qualified persons to the Lot engagement and instructions to exit the area through to the mistakenness of the soldiers of the visitors as spies when they were angels to the actual destruction to the turning into a pillar of salt the disobeying wife of Lot and finally ends at the departure of Lot and his two daughters. What is often not addressed either by theologians or fire brand preachers is the incest that took place afterwards which to me is the more problematic issue. Theologically it would be too uncomfortable to say it was about abuse of women and the sexual aspersions that the related family members seem to display coupled with the interpretation of the term “to know” in Hebrew as sex. Just as Abraham went into Egypt and speculated they would kill him so he effectively pimps his own wife Sarah they relations as they are seem to go to territories and cast sexual issues on others or are carrying out a permissive type of incest in Hebrew culture in the name of procreation and the continuation of the bloodline in the face of an absent matriarch in the household seeing she was turned into a pillar of salt.

The daughters are blamed for the incest albeit Lot was drunk but evidently not too drunk to get an erection and somehow make it happen; and the justification of homosexuality is easier to roll of the tongue from the pulpit. The church and theologians seem not to want to deal with the story in its entirety.

Booted man has left the church

He left the church body in March he said after some several months of pressure and continued ostracism and things came to a head when a meeting was called to discuss ‘change’ with strong hints of some sort of reparative therapy and prayer as the only way out. Lord knows my own experience in my twenties when I too like so many others tried the ‘pray the gay away’ strategy when in ignorance thought and was led to belief my homosexuality is a sin and a deviant behaviour; try as I might and pray as fervently as I did with even abstinence attempted the ‘gay’ did not go away; in fact it became even more pronounced. Urges and desires cannot be just driven away like that; if God did not want me to be a homosexual he would have made it so from the very beginning. Why would so many other animals display same gender sexual tendencies so much, are they guilty of some deviance too?

I like the young man went on fasting, asked for the Holy Spirit to (re)wash me or change me and it never came to fruition. In fact the opposite occurred where it was if the spirit spoke and said you are good as you are and there is no need to amend anything in that department. I would have loved to have asked or ask the young man to ask his elders the question of Luke 17:34 and its tenets where Jesus in a teaching on the rapture makes what appears to be a neutral non-discriminatory reference where it read (King James Version):

I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other shall be left.

Let me end here for now but I did this post just to show the madness coming from ignorant folks who in an information age refuse to accept the reality. If I may use the JCHS’s own biblical quote they end their newsletters with:

“The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.” Isaiah 9: 2 KJV

JCHS needs to take their own counsel and step out of darkness into the present realities. The church overall is missing the need to fulfil the word yet at the same time realise that other matters in society needs attention such as the loss of life. Where are these antigay groups apart from obligatory condemnation during child’s month on abuse of children, pastors in inappropriate acts with congregants and or children as well or the crime, murders and highly suspected political corruption?

Bearing in mind King James in whose name the most popular English translation of the Bible in 1610 is in was actually bisexual even in the face of a buggery law; pity the goody King would not have foreseen the work put in would be used as a destructive weapon hundreds of years later against LGBT people. Let us put to rest the silliness about “homosexual lifestyle” once and for all; as a phrase it is pure propaganda, a gossipy generalization and completely unworthy of a Christian who, following the counsel in Proverbs seeks understanding and insight into life and people. As Christians some will have to decide if we are going to partake of divisive “party spirit” that racked the church at Corinth or follow Christ as discerning attentive principles – to that still small voice and sharpen concerns for the ostracized instead of creating more strife.

Oh these modern day Pharisees, Saducees and Scribes who think their correctness is the be all and end all. Frankly envy of the apparent freedom of LGBT people could be called ‘freedom envy’ in my view. The role of freedom envy in the anti LGBT crusade is confirmed by the repeated and emphatic reference to “the homosexual lifestyle.” This is left a vague generality, as though it were something everyone already understands. The so called “homosexual lifestyle” is associated with a US view of homosexuality and dates back to the HIV/AIDS epidemic and stories of bath houses in places such as San Francisco; hence folks like Dr Wayne West of JCHS uses it as well to vectorise gays in his antigay advocacy or the deceptive “HIV is a gay disease ploy.” There is no such thing as a ‘homosexual lifestyle’ just as there is no such thing as “heterosexual lifestyle” heterosexual live on a “lifestyle” continuum just as homosexuals do. The continuum includes people in decades long monogamous relationships, people who live in social isolation, people who in into bar scenes etc people who move from relationship to relationship.

The gay Christian minded brethren has since moved on though disappointed that he cannot serve as he is used to but is searching for a worship space that can afford him that; I told him he may have a hard time finding one that is so embracing; I too have been finding it difficult to find such a space.

Finally as for the Levitical or Leviticusal or holiness codes (on homosexuality) bear in mind in the KJV the preamble is quite clear as it reads in part:

“The book of Leviticus accordingly is a manual for priests detailing the religious rules and procedures which the priests had to observe and enforce for the covenant nation of Israel. Its historical setting is the two years Israel spent encamped at Mount Sinai; it contains no further account of Israel’s journeys from Egypt to Canaan.”

It continues:

“The fact that Moses, the author of Leviticus devoted an entire book to priestly matters shows the importance that the religious observances were to have ever afterwards for the Israelites. Christians, under the terms of Christ’s new covenant do not regard these Levitical regulations as binding, but they do obey the same God, not in the letter of the law but in the spirit of Christ.”

Peace & tolerance

H

Time for rational dialogue (indeed) on sexuality and tolerance

I am pleased at some of the more rational discourse that seems to be slowly emanating from some persons although they may totally support or agree with matters of sexual orientation. The following appeared in the Observer for all intents and purposes is worth reviewing in fairness as written by Christopher Burns.

The original title was: "Time for rational dialogue on sexuality and tolerance"

He wrote:

We would only be postponing the inevitable were we to engage political expediency over serious and far-reaching human rights actions including, but not limited to, granting our citizens justiciable rights. Recent events in Orlando, Florida, should also impel us to consider opening up the public square to address issues we have been sweeping under the carpet for years, hoping they just go away.

I can hear, “Burns, yuh mad?!” I am not mad at all, just brave!

None of this means we should mortgage our morality, disband our social and cultural mores, or surrender our sovereignty to outside forces or powers. In all we do we must, as a country and people, protect what is uniquely ours. Nevertheless, we cannot operate in a way that promotes or pits one group against or over the other; neither should we ignore the fundamental truth that speaks to our common identity as human beings — complex though it is.

It ought to begin with dialogue that encourages tolerance over hate and bigotry. It must eschew behaviours such as that of a father who, in February 2004, concerned that his son might be gay, turned up at the Dunoon Park Technical High School in east Kingston and encouraged other students to “beat di bwoy” who was an eleventh-grader at the time. Had it not been for the intervention of a teacher, the boy could have been killed. It was so bad one of the teachers gave an eyewitness account that went, “They were intent on killing him…They were like a pack of wild animals who had smelled blood, and if it wasn’t for another staff member who jumped on top of him, you would be reporting on a mob killing...”

To begin with, humanity is very complex. Hence, we must be slow to judge, to condemn, or to wish harm for those we disagree with, especially in the name of religion or based on some false sense of piety or enlightenment. For, try as hard as we might, we never know what our sons or daughters are going to become. We can only hope for the best for them, but we can never be certain of the choices they will make or the path they will pursue in their personal lives. If they choose the “forbidden path”, does it automatically disqualify them from being recipients of our love, care, support, and protection? I think not, since we can hate the sin but still love the sinner — we all sin anyway.

There are many mysteries about our behaviours, choices, interests, likes and dislikes that remain enigmatic, so much so, neither science nor religion has been able to unravel the mysteries — such is the nature of mankind. Human and social biology is indeed intricate, yet much of it is responsible for our individuality and unique qualities. Still, it is remarkable that people are people wherever we go.

One does not have to hold scholarships in sociology or religious studies to know that our complex humanity is shaped, in no small measure, by modes and methods of socialisation, years of religious indoctrination, and early cultural moulding. With the complexity and exposure to various socio-religious dogmas, and moral and cultural teachings, come myriad problems and misunderstandings, chief among which are insensitivity, insensibility, assumptions, mis-assumptions, ready acceptance, intolerance, hatred, bigotry, indifference, and downright cruelty.

The sad truth is that none of these diverse offshoots is limited to any one culture, ethnicity, race, civilisation, country, or religion. The maladies are as universal as the casing of the sky. There have been many instances in human history, and indeed in the history of the world, where humanity has engaged horrible crimes against other homo sapiens and has displayed the worst behaviour toward one another for one reason or another.

At times, there appears to be justification for some of the actions, such as when good men stood up to defeat general ugliness, genocide, slavery and other dastardly deeds. However, there other times when our actions and treatment of each other are completely unjustifiable, sadistically unnecessary, heartlessly brutal, and nauseatingly animalistic, mostly in the name of religion and politics. Is it because so many see these two things as indispensable to survival? Even so, there is everything destructive about those forms of extremism.

In the aftermath of some of the most barbarous, wicked and selfish acts against certain individuals, ethnicities, groups, children, women, individuals with disabilities, or an entire generation, while some ponder the existence of God and question the purpose or usefulness of having such deity, others celebrate and give succour to evil.

Those who contemplate God’s existence often ask, how is it possible for the God of equipoise, love, mercy, omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience allow such crimes, actions, and circumstances to happen, most times against innocent children, old people, the historically dispossessed, socially and economically marginalised and vulnerable? It makes us wonder if God picks sides in some to these despicable atrocities, and why it always appears that might trumps right.

This brings me to last week’s terrorist attack on the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida, where 49 persons were killed and 53 badly injured. Pulse, as it is being reported, is a gay nightclub and meeting point for members of the LGBT community. Pulse came of age after the AIDS/HIV crisis in the United States during the mid-1980s. Gay people have a right to peaceful assembly, a right to love as their hearts dictate, and a right to the freedoms that all of us — heterosexual or asexual — enjoy or aspire to enjoy. While we may not understand their preferences and vice versa, we may loathe the look of their relationships, but it is not right or reasonable to murder them en masse on the assumption or evidence that they practise homosexuality or bisexuality.

One does not have to be homosexual, or even crypto-homosexual, to see evil in the actions of the killer — Omar Mir Seddique Mateen. Therefore, before we jump for joy and declare senselessly and uncaringly that “a bayyy, a good fi dem…di ‘ole a dem fi dead…”, let us consider the possibility that Omar Mir Seddique Mateen might have killed a man or woman, a son or a daughter, who held the secret cure to some of the world’s most deadly diseases. Mateen may have killed the mother or father of a child whose very future and existence depended upon the presence and involvement of its parent(s). We should never assume that because someone attends a gay or straight nightclub that that automatically makes the individual gay or straight; nothing could be further from the truth. Therefore, we must be circumspect in our readiness to condemn and to heap fire in people’s bosoms.

Quicksand judgement

Consider this: As part of my professional development and certainly during postgraduate research work, I would visit many places, interview people from all walks of life, virtually live among them, in order to understand their behaviour and way of life. One of my close friends is a successful prosecutor. She is married to a former FBI officer whose job takes him many places. He is as heterosexual as heterosexuals get, yet, it was not strange for him to visit gay clubs, reggae clubs or other night spots across Florida, because that was how he observed, ingratiated himself, and caught criminals.

He is a very successful professional. He often tells of the many instances when he would cross-dress — drag queen RuPaul could not outstage him when it comes on to cross-dressing. He did this just to catch lawbreakers. Were he still with the FBI, he could well have been at the Pulse nightclub, scoping it for hardened drug dealers, violent criminals, or murderers. He could have been there trying to close in on a case of child molestation while Omar Mateen was busy spraying bullets all over the place. We would have lost a decent citizen and an eminent law enforcement professional just because his job caused him to be at a gay club. We must move away from narrow-mindedness and think more broadly. Members of the church community have an enormous role to play in shifting the thinking and mindset in this regard.

I am not a churchman. I do not embrace all aspects of Christianity. I do read theBible on occasion and find the stories mostly interesting. Of all the books of theBible, I happen to appreciate the books of Job, Nehemiah and Ephesians, but I love the book of Proverbs more than any other because it teaches wisdom. I would recommend the book of Proverbs, especially to Christian fundamentalists and bigots whose fixation with the book of Leviticus is tantamount to cruelty.

I was not surprised, but rather embarrassed by utterances from two so-called evangelical US pastors. First, Bible-thumping, hand-clapping, foot-stamping, religious bigot Roger Jimenez, pastor of Verity Baptist Church in Sacramento, California, emitted so much bile it would cause a John crow’s stomach to turn. Pastor Jimenez, relying on a passage from the story of David in the Old Testament, said with respect to the Orlando shootings: “There’s no tragedy…I wish the Government would round them [gays] all up, put them up against a wall, put a firing squad in front of them, and blow their brains out...The Bible tells us to hate the enemy of God...”

Shamefully, when asked about a gay or lesbian person, a bisexual person, or a transgender person who is a Christian, Pastor Jimenez casually replied, “Well, here’s the thing: if you read Romans, Chapter 1 in context, God gave them over to a reprobate mind..” I wonder what he would do, had his son, daughter, mother, or brother been killed while visiting Pulse nightclub in pursuit of winning souls for Christ? He would no doubt say they are ‘heaven bound’.

As if Pastor Roger Jimenez’s diatribe and caravan of hate were not enough, another religious lunatic, this time, Pastor Steve Anderson of Faithful Word Baptist Church in Tempe, Arizona, created his own YouTube sermon Sunday [YouTube has since removed the offensive video] in which he advanced copious nonsense, aimed at inciting violence and hatred toward homosexuals.

Anderson said: “The good news is that there’s [sic] 50 less paedophiles in this world, because, you know, these homosexuals are a bunch of disgusting perverts and paedophiles. That’s who was a victim here, a bunch of, just, disgusting homosexuals at a gay bar, okay? But the bad news is that this is now going to be used, I’m sure, to push for gun control, where, you know, law-abiding normal Americans are not going to be allowed to have guns for self-defence. And then I’m sure it’s also going to be used to push an agenda against so-called hate speech...”

Pastors Steve Anderson and Roger Jimenez are not alone in their disgusting piety. They have friends and company inside and outside the church who share similar or even stronger passion and hatred for people whose sexual interests and preferences they do not understand or share.

Clearly, it is their inalienable right to disagree with or disavow any practice they deem counter-intuitive to their religious beliefs or find offensive to their conscience. However, it is completely wrong to incite violence against a group of people whose sexual involvement and appetite only they and their God understand.

There is no demur on my part — none whatsoever — that no one should be forced to embrace practices he or she finds objectionable or unconscionable. However, it is beyond backward and cruel to do as Pastors Anderson and Jimenez and then use Leviticus 20: 30 as an anchor and as justification for their bigotry. Yes, Leviticus 20: 13 says, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them...” Yet, Proverbs 6: 16-19 speaks very clearly and sensibly about the things that the Lord hates.

Here is how Proverbs 6: 16-19 presents the thing that the Lord likes: “These six things doth the Lord hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood; An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief; A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren…” Based on Proverbs 6:16-19, reasonable inference can be drawn that the Lord does not agree with much of what Pastors Anderson and Jimenez stand for or represent. Remember, I am neither a “ Bible man” nor a Christian, but I know better than to buy into the gospel of hate and bigotry.

There is always going to be disagreement around the subjects of love and relationship. Some of the disagreements are going to be shaped by experiences, fear, religious indoctrination, and a host of other things, which should cause more of us to agree to disagree than to wage war against each other and incite violence toward a group with which some of us hold staunch disagreement. Tolerance is therefore an imperative, especially in societies where members of minority groups have to walk on egg shells every day of their lives, and where governments are less concerned about comprehensive human rights, but care more about political expediency and populism.

Burnscg@aol.com

ENDS

also see:

Ian Boyne on Grow Up On Gay Intolerance! from sister blog

What the PM should tell Mrs Malahoo Forte (Observer)

Ronnie Thwaites’ rubbish on flying rainbow flags grooms children into “particular lifestyle”

Reverend Al Miller has no moral authority (yet again) to speak on flags & correctness

Flags, forced evictions & foolishness

Dormant anti gay feelings resurface in Florida shooting aftermath

a previous piece by Mr Burns: Bad men seem to love women's wigs (Observer opinion piece) regarding the cross dressing issues and the fugitive Dudus Coke