Showing posts with label Bloggers Writing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Bloggers Writing. Show all posts

Sunday, January 15, 2012

Did Apostle Paul actually accepted Christian homosexuals?

Maybe yes, just was able to share this as so many other stuff have been happening here in Jamaica as you may have realised by the posts. In November 2011 this news came and also  a book (photo below) with accompanying YOUTUBE videos to explain the legal paradox and the supposed unsolved Romans text on homosexuality. 



For the last 2,000 years, Christians have been taught to believe that Apostle Paul condemned homosexuality. But a new discovery documents that he deliberately acknowledged that it does not prevent anyone from entering heaven. This discovery by internationally acclaimed cryptographer Michael Wood removes the final barrier to full societal acceptance of gays and lesbians.


“Michael Wood’s discovery is remarkable because it solves a colossal paradox regarding Paul’s Greek that has baffled scholars for 2,000 years,” says Dr. William Berg, former professor of Greek and Roman Classics at Stanford University, UCLA, and other academic institutions.


Paul’s only unequivocal reference to homosexuality is found within Romans 1:18-3:20, a Biblical passage that has mystified scholars for two millennia. “The interpretation of Romans 1:18-3:20 has been notoriously difficult for almost every commentator,” Richard Longenecker, a distinguished New Testament scholar, writes in his book ‘Studies in Paul.’ “Earlier interpreters such as Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and Erasmus wrestled with this issue and it continues to plague commentators today.”’


The passage is riddled with paradoxes. It says that “only the doers of the law will be vindicated by God,” and “by the works of the law no one will be vindicated.” The passage also mysteriously separates idolatrous, homosexual, orgy fests from transgressions worthy of spiritual death. “In finding the definitive solution to Paul’s legal paradox, I inadvertently discovered why he separated the idolatrous, same-sex orgies from the things he considered worthy of spiritual death,” said Wood.


Dr. Berg has spent many months examining the linguistic and historical basis of what he describes as Wood’s “remarkable” discovery. “Michael Wood reveals to the public a well-kept secret, namely that the apostle Paul, like the rest of his contemporaries, divided the commands of the Jewish law into two groups demarcated by Leviticus 19:18—‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the commandments based on loving your neighbor were ‘Justices of the Torah.’ Those not based on Leviticus 19:18 were ‘Jobs of the Torah.’” Dr. Berg explained.


Wood’s solution is definitive, elegant, and verifiable. Romans 2:13-26 teaches: Only the doers of the ‘Justices of the Torah’ will be vindicated before God. Romans 3:20 says, “By the ‘Jobs of the Torah’ no one will be vindicated.” Not only is there no contradiction, but the two teachings have always been simple restatements of each other; the “Great Paradox” is no paradox at all! MORE


meanwhile



Monumental Cryptography Discovery Reveals Homosexuality Not Forbidden in Bible


Apparently Paul’s paradoxes laid out in the book of Romans in the Bible have plagued theologians and historians for thousands of years. A classic argument against cultural permissiveness toward homosexuality stems from Romans, in which Paul appears to say homosexuals need not apply for an all-inclusive pass to Heaven – because they will be denied.


But Wood’s discovery has turned the entire scripture upside down, and it appears that the Bible has had a welcome mat out for the gays all along.


“Michael Wood’s discovery is remarkable because it solves a colossal paradox regarding Paul’s Greek that has baffled scholars for 2,000 years,” says Dr. William Berg, who taught Greek and Roman Classics at Stanford University.


Paul’s only unequivocal reference to homosexuality is found within Romans 1:18-3:20, a Biblical passage that has mystified scholars for two millennia. “The interpretation of Romans1:18-3:20 has been notoriously difficult for almost every commentator,” Richard Longenecker, the Distinguished New Testament Scholar at Wheaton College, writes in his book Studies in Paul. “Earlier interpreters such as Origen, Jerome, Augustine, and Erasmus wrestled with this issue and it continues to plague commentators today.”


The passage is riddled with paradoxes. It says that “only the doers of the law will be vindicated by God,” and “by the works of the law no one will be vindicated.” The passage also mysteriously separates idolatrous, homosexual orgy fests from transgressions worthy of spiritual death. “In finding the definitive solution to Paul’s legal paradox, I inadvertently discovered why he separated the idolatrous, same-sex orgies from the things he considered worthy of spiritual death,” said Wood.


Wood’s solution is definitive, elegant, and verifiable. Romans 2:13-26 teaches: Only the doers of the “Justices of the Torah” will be vindicated before God. Romans 3:20 says, “By the ‘Jobs of the Torah’ no one will be vindicated.” Not only is there no contradiction, but the two teachings have always been simple restatements of each other; the “Great Paradox” is no paradox at all!


This legal solution fully explains Paul’s treatment of homosexuality. Paul’s passage excludes idolatrous, homosexual orgy fests from things which he considered worthy of spiritual death, things such as “bad-mouthing others,” “deceiving,” and “inflicting pain.” Those engaged in idolatrous, homosexual orgies weren’t violating the Justices. (They weren’t violating the precept “Love your neighbor as yourself.”) Therefore, Paul was obliged to separate this from his list of things which did violate the Justices.


The finding is significant because it documents that Paul purposefully separated the same-sex acts; it was a conscious, deliberate decision consistent with the rest of the passage. In fact, it was demanded by the rest of the passage. The resolution of the paradox empirically proves that Paul’s view on homosexuality was very different from what Christians had thought for 2,000 years.


Although Romans 1 contains the only unequivocal reference to homosexuality, anti-homosexual statements have been introduced into other passages in newer versions of the English Bible. As for these modern changes to the Biblical text: “Michael Wood has gone the extra mile in being faithful to Paul’s Greek,” said Dr. Berg. “He shows, time and again, that the words traditionally mistranslated as ‘homosexual,’ ‘effeminate,’ ‘impure,’ and so forth, are really targeting selfish, unloving, unjust activity and have nothing to do with sexual orientation. He shows that once again Paul was condemning those who violate the Justices of the Torah, and nothing more.”












the book can be had at AMAZON

Tuesday, November 22, 2011

No to buggery! - Young candidates oppose relaxing laws, but want more education on subject

UPDATE 22.11.11 8:12pm please listen before reading below.


BY HG HELPS Editor-at-Large helpsh@jamaicaobserver.com

FOUR aspiring politicians have come out against relaxing buggery laws in Jamaica, although they believe, collectively, that there should be national dialogue on the subject.

The four — the Jamaica Labour Party’s Paula Kerr-Jarrett, who will represent the party in Hanover East and Collin Virgo, the candidate in Manchester South, as well as the People’s National Party’s candidate in St Mary West, Jolyan Silvera and his colleague in St Andrew North East, John-Paul White — are all, based upon religious considerations, against the act of buggery. However, they argue that discussions should be held on the subject with the people as a whole, to determine whether or not Jamaica should continue to enforce buggery related laws.




Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) candidate for Manchester South, Collin Virgo (left) states his view on the buggery law while his JLP colleague, Paula Kerr-Jarrret, who will contest the East Hanover seat, as well as People’s National Party candidates Jolyan Silvera (3rd left), who will be running in St Mary West, and John-Paul White (St Andrew North East), listen at yesterday’s Observer Monday Exchange. (Photo: Naphtali Junior)

Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/No-to-buggery-#ixzz1eRXbFI3s


The four were guests at yesterday’s Observer Monday Exchange at the newspaper’s Beechwood Avenue headquarters in St Andrew.

The subject arose from revelations at a conference on HIV/AIDS being held in The Bahamas, which showed that countries without buggery laws had a lower HIV prevalence rate among homosexual men, than countries with such laws.

“I was brought up as a Christian. I am a practising Christian, and I know that there are a lot of things that are in the Bible as well as just generally, morally, the approach to it is not acceptable,” said Kerr-Jarrett.

“We need to educate our people in Jamaica more before laws are changed, because if you remove something, a void is created, and before anything is done there ought to be a blitz of education on the subject,” she added.

Virgo, who will challenge veteran member of parliament Michael Peart, said that the matter of buggery was a delicate one which requires solid discussion.

“The constituency where I am from, that is not something that you would be able to sell to them right now,” Virgo said.

“I come from a very strong Christian constituency, which has one of the largest concentration of Seventh-day Adventists in the country, and that's the church I grew up in.

“I don’t get the feeling that they (constituents) are going to be highly supportive of that one. To be an elected representative of the people is not going to be my responsibility to force my view on them. I will encourage dialogue, but at the end of the day, changing the law will not allow the problems to be solved,” he said.

“Knowledge and some level of exposure will cause it to be changed. If there isn’t acceptance by a significant portion of the people of Jamaica, changing the laws will not solve the problems,” Virgo added.

Both PNP representatives also echoed similar sentiments that buggery was immoral and an effort should be made to clarify issues surrounding the subject.

For Silvera, who is going up against JLP powerhouse Robert Montague, buggery has no place in the society.

“I grew up in a Christian home and I have my morals intact. But this is where we are today and this is reality,” Silvera said.

“We do have to engage, and we have to sit down and talk ,and take certain things into consideration, because at the end of the day, the Bible is ambiguous, there are double meanings every chapter you read.

“We are a civil society, and if buggery has to be brought to the table to be talked about, I don’t think I would have a problem listening. But at the end of the day I know where I stand, because I have Christian beliefs. I think the law should stay, but I am open for discussions. We would be a bit premature as a country to open it up presently,” Silvera said.

As for White, the son of a former preacher, education is the key to handling matters related to buggery.

“I am also from a spiritual and Christian background, but we need to educate the country more,” he said.

“When a person hears about buggery, he associates it with, based on our socialisation, things to do with homosexual activities.

“As representatives, we really need to seek the opinion of those we represent, and based on the majority of those opinions, we take it into the Houses of Parliament.,” he said.

“My biggest concern about the law has more to do with a health point of view and the transmission of diseases associated with such activities, especially in a society where the cost of health care is really expensive,” White said.



also see on my sister blog GLBTQJA on Wordpress new developments on the UK front:


Andrew Mitchell said the policy had been wrongly reported as a threat to cut aid
Minister confirms UK will redirect aid, not cut it, for human rights violations

Andrew Mitchell (photo) said the policy had been wrongly reported as a threat to cut aid

The government has confirmed plans to redirect aid away from overseas governments who fail to recognise human rights, but has said it will still ensure aid reaches those in need.

Some African states reacted angrily to Secretary of State for International Development Andrew Mitchell’s comments that aid would be redirected away from governments to other bodies, believing that overall aid would be cut unless anti-gay laws were repealed.

Now that we have the smoke cleared several questions come to mind:

1) were we too quick to jump the gun locally?

2) were our advocates using the original report as a tag along to unethically promote decriminalization of buggery on a false footing?



Although the debate is on in earnest the advocates should never have in effect mislead the nation and should have sought to clarify the position before diving head on with coalition teams at that participating knowing or unknowingly. How can we have any moral authority to ask the nation for any dialogue or present our arguments on the strength of a farce in a sense to bolster our call for the buggery law to be removed?

True representation for any group must be above board and must be untestable ethically speaking and have some moral soundness, after all our detractors will judge us on that as they do already condemn us because of our “nastiness” we cannot go making demands and calls for acceptance on shaky ground.

Too many double standards? or are the British now backpedaling too seeing the furor the whole thing has caused?

Suffice it to say some with say cutting aid versus redirecting it is the same but let us remember aid comes in many forms and tranches.



also see posts and hear previous audio commentary: 

Not Ready For Gays ……. Gay Marriage smoke screen reintroduced ……………. political dodging



and



Peace and tolerance

H

Monday, November 21, 2011

New Shepherd, Same Old Sankey, Carolyn Cooper on Buggery & such ..........


Carolyn Cooper, 

Unlike Bruce Golding who strayed from the fold of the JLP looking for greener pastures, Andrew Holness has been a faithful sheep. Groomed by the shepherd of all shepherds, Eddie Seaga, Andrew unquestioningly stayed in line in the flock. Perhaps he was always too young to pluck up the courage to challenge the authority of the shepherd. As Holness pointedly observed in his inaugural address, he was a mere babe in arms when Golding became a member of parliament in 1972.

Incidentally, Golding remains the youngest person ever elected to Parliament - at the age of 24. But, as the final years of his political career have proven, an early start is no guarantee of a glorious end. Andrew Holness had better learn that lesson. Prematurely elevated to the rank of chief shepherd, Holness has become Jamaica's youngest prime minister.

I'm sure that some of the older heads in the JLP are quite vexed that 'di bwoy bruck di line, fly pass im nest an dust dem out. But dem ha fi bow. A young people time now, an hair dye naa no swag. If dem waan try win election, dem better simmer down an follow backa im'.

Antiquated ideas

For a relatively young man, our new prime minister has some rather antiquated ideas about sex, gender and politics. In his inaugural speech, he made a particularly pompous statement that struck me forcefully: "The ancients saw politics as the highest calling of man. It is what men do in the interest of the public good without thought for their personal benefit or threat of sanction; it is what we do because it is right, not because it is expedient. In this regard, our leaders must lead."

Who are these ancients that Prime Minister Holness cites so authoritatively? I suppose he means the Greeks. Not the modern ones who haven't been able to balance their national Budget and whose bailout is threatening the stability of the Eurozone. Mr Holness' 'ancients' are long dead and their grand rhetoric has little value these days. You can't take ancient Greek political philosophy to the bank. Certainly not to the European Central Bank.

Modern Greek politicians like George Papandreou are no different from our own leaders who like to spout platitudes. 'Personal benefit' often appears to take precedence over 'public good'. Papandreou threatened to call a referendum over the rescue package cobbled together for the Greek economy. It was a gamble to gain support for the austerity measures and so protect his own political interests. Then he flip-flopped and backed down. After all the fancy footwork, Papandreou was forced to resign. The ancients must be turning in their collective grave.

Politics - a man's game?

Quite apart from the emptiness of Mr Holness' holier-than-thou political moralising is the troubling issue of gender. If politics really is 'the highest calling of man', where does that leave women? Out in the cold? Or do women have a higher calling than mere politics? Who is the 'we' to whom the prime minister appeals in his inaugural address? Men? And what is the gender of the leaders who must lead? Masculine?

The Jamaica Women's Political Caucus must be quite alarmed by the prime minister's gendered politics. Established in 1992, the caucus vigorously challenges the stereotype that politics is 'what men do'. Its mission is to increase the number of women in politics at the highest levels. Putting its money where its mouth is, the caucus pays the nomination fees for all female candidates.

UNESCO's Inter-Parliamentary Union ranks Jamaica at No. 86 of 188 countries in the world, based on the percentage of women in Parliament. Only eight of the 60 members of our Parliament are female. This is not a good ratio. We are way below Cuba (No. 6), Guyana (No. 25), Trinidad and Tobago (No. 28) and the Dominican Republic (No. 53). But we're doing much better than Barbados (No. 103), Brazil (No. 110), Haiti (No. 125) and Belize (No. 136).

Why is it that more women don't enter representational politics in Jamaica? Is it because we ourselves believe that it's a man's game? Or have we been deliberately excluded from the men's club? If our youthful prime minister can speak as if representational politics is still a male preserve, what hope is there to transform the patriarchal culture and create opportunities for a fresh crop of women leaders?

Taking the bull by the horns

On matters of sexual politics, new Andrew Holness sounds a lot like old Bruce Golding. Holness hasn't come out and said, "Not in my Cabinet." But it's clear that he's not prepared to take the bull by the horns and initiate the repeal of Jamaica's outdated buggery law. It was the 'ancients' who conceived the Buggery Act of 1533. Not the Greeks, this time, for whom homosexuality was an accepted practice.

Almost 500 years ago, the English parliament passed a law that criminalised 'unnatural' sex acts. These included anal penetration and bestiality. The punishment for buggery was death by hanging. This act takes us right back to the primitive Old Testament theology of the Book of Leviticus.

The buggery law was repealed in the UK in 1967 but remains on the books in many of Britain's former colonies, including Jamaica. A recentSunday Gleaner article, 'Not ready for gays', reports the following: 'Despite renewed pressure from Britain for Jamaica to repeal its anti-buggery law, Prime Minister Andrew Holness says it will be up to Jamaicans to signal such desire.'

So why not call a referendum on the repeal of the buggery law? Perhaps Jamaicans are ready for change. Politics is not about expediency. It's what we do because it is right. Our prime minister needs to practise what he preaches. Otherwise, all of this talk about youth and change is nothing but the same old Sankey.

Carolyn Cooper is a professor of literary and cultural studies at the University of the West Indies, Mona. Visit her bilingual blog at http://carolynjoycooper.wordpress.com/. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and karokupa@gmail.com.

Rev Clinton Chisholm on "Consensual Sex Revisited"

Another entry from Reverend, Blogger, Talk show host and columnist Clinton Chisholm touches on homosexual sex and the public discourse surrounding consent. Although aged it was brought to my attention on the strength of an editorial in the Gleaner earlier this year when the debate had commenced in a sense on gay issues. It was also published as a letter in the same paper. The Editorial was entitled: "


(Excerpt)

Entrenched homophobia

We understand why the various commissions, committees and legislators who drafted the charter failed to expressly declare people's rights to freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation.

It has do with the receding, but still-entrenched homophobia in Jamaica that caused Mr Golding to declare, more than three years ago, that gays would not be welcome in his Cabinet. Politicians fear that any perception that they embrace or are soft on homosexuality will cost them votes and open them to discrimination and stigma.

The attitude, we insist, is cowardly, retrogressive, socially dangerous and offensive to human rights.

Serious concerns for all

To be clear, our position is neither an endorsement nor rejection of homosexuality. Frankly, we do not care. How consenting adults choose to live their lives is none of our business. There are, however, a couple of things that concern us and which we believe should be the concern of all Jamaicans.

First, while we note and commend the advances in individuals' rights contained in the charter, we are aware that the possibility of discrimination against any group is a toehold for the erosion of the rights of others, notwithstanding the cover of constitutional protection.

Moreover, the fear of stigma, discrimination and violence pushes many people into the closet. Their talents are often underutilised, to the detriment of the society and economy. There is evidence, too, of the health problems faced by gays, many of whom prefer to live without treatment for their illnesses, including HIV/AIDS, for fear of discrimination. The public-health risks are obvious.

It is nearly 50 years since the promulgation of the Constitution; waiting a few more months to get a better charter won't hurt.

Improving the charter will require that it lie in the legislature for months in accordance with the time stipulation for amending the Constitution. In the meantime, legislators should expunge the buggery law, the main bit of existing legislation that makes homosexuality illegal.


Here is the response from Reverend Chisolm let us juxtapose it to the recent comments, concerns and rhetoric by other religious leaders or fanatics however you want to label them, see the post immediately following this one that has several of those responses or 

Anti Sodomy Decriminalization/Repulsion action intensifies from the Christian Community



Jamaica Gleaner Company

“To be clear, our position is neither an endorsement nor rejection of homosexuality. Frankly, we do not care. How consenting adults choose to live their lives is none of our business.” (Jamaica Gleaner editorial, April 1, 2011)

To some the above sentiment of the editorial is progressive, politically correct and defensible. To me it is dangerous and disingenuous. I say the editorial’s posture is disingenuous because it seems to reflect a neutral position about homosexuality but this veneer of neutrality is blown to pieces by the realization that the position of the editorial is not neutrality but indictable moral ambivalence/indifference about homosexuality summed up in the words “…we do not care.” How can a responsible and prestigious media organization (which influences public opinion) claim it is none of its business “how consenting adults choose to live their lives…”?

The editorial’s posture is societally dangerous in that how people live their lives sexually is critical to the society’s health concerns and even continued existence. Mathew Staver is correct when he says “It is a truism frequently forgotten by large complex societies: only societies that reproduce survive.” (Same-Sex Marriage, 2004, p.8) Ponder the societal consequence of universalizing homosexuality as the sexual norm!

Can one be really socially responsible but ambivalent about consensual homosexual sex, consensual adultery, consensual incest, consensual sadomasochistic sex given the relational implications of such acts beyond even the health costs of dealing with AIDS and other STIs? Has the editor given thought to the social cost of pregnancies deemed ‘unwanted’ by putative parents and especially the impact of absentee father figures on the lives of our young men?

Let us get it clear in our minds, consensuality even along with privacy and age-maturity does not constitute adequate moral justification for sexual behavior, without more, as the lawyers would say. If we hold the view that a certain sexual behavior is morally defensible let’s have the moral courage to be upfront and say so and not hide behind a thin veneer of neutrality. Homosexuality may indeed need to be decriminalized and the buggery law expunged but the reasons for doing so must be more convincing than simply moral ambivalence or apathy about what consenting adults do sexually.



Friday, November 18, 2011

INCREASE IN MALE HOOKERS - More men doing 'business' in New Kingston says the Star ............ but

Well a fact that some of us who have been seriously concerned with for some time is now out in the open yet again, this is of course not the first time the Star News has carried this particular population remember this one 






and my blogs are replete with commentary and concerns about the lack of concern about the advocacy from the very aloof advocates namely JFLAG Jamaica Forum for Lesbians Allsexuals and Gays and its parent NGO Jamaica AIDS Support for Life JASL. Only last night there was an altercation in the same vicinity how coincidental? 


Above is a shoe of one of the cross dressing divas from last evening's drama by Trafalgar Square. It was in August of this year that a letter writer who happened to reside in the nearby community complained to the Gleaner on the issue:


Then came the two day civil disobedience against the aforementioned NGOs on August 23 and 24 as the men felt they have been ignored and are just used by the advocacy structure to make money with no meaningful actions to assist them, then came the other "distractions" as I call them namely the internationally attractive issues for JFLAG et al so the men and their issues are overlooked that is not to say the men's behaviour is not a major cause of concern both in public and on the premises of JASL where a ban was instituted and a canine security team employed to keep them off the property. 

Apartheid like behaviour in Jamaica from the very systems founded to deal with homelessness and LGBT welfare? 

I carried that piece on my sister blog GLBTQ Jamaica on Blogger, as at the preparation of this post four of the men who were on remand since last evening were being processed, evidence of the events were captured via photo apparently from passers-by who witnessed the drama with the homeless men and their friends, men who have been terrorizing them from surrounding areas including staff from a certain popular supermarket and others. 

November 18, 2011 incident here: Men rushed in New Kingston .... police hold 4

also see posts of previous accounts from the same area:

Have a read of the Star News piece and decide for yourselves:

There has been an increase in the number of male prostitutes hanging out in New Kingston, St Andrew, THE WEEKEND STAR has learnt.

Both female and male prostitutes alike are known to frequent the area, but in recent months, the number of male hookers has mounted drastically.

Information reaching THE WEEKEND STAR is that close to 70 male prostitutes are now frequenting Trafalgar Park and Antigua Avenue on a nightly basis.

THE WEEKEND STAR has also learnt that even teenage boys are now being spotted in the area.

When our investigative team visited the areas about 8 p.m. on Wednesday night there was hardly anyone in sight.

About an hour later there were at least 20 of them.

One woman who works in an office on Antigua Avenue said "A whole heap a dem congregate in the park (Trafalgar Park) across the road then after hours dem come across."

She reasoned, "Some a dem very young, teenagers. Dem look normal and dress normal, yuh only know say dem gay because sometimes yuh see dem a slap dem one another pan dem bottom and a hug up each other."

wig and spike heel

A security guard, who said that he was responsible for one of the buildings on Antigua Avenue at nights, told THE WEEKEND STAR that "Sometimes more than 50 of them out here. Dem gi demself girl names like 'Beyonce' and 'Simone'. Some a dem all dress up ina dem wig and spike heel."

He expressed, "Only man come pick dem up, a bare expensive vehicle all Range Rover. If dem a drive up and see mi dem circle and come back."

But a 23-year-old homosexual male who was seen lurking in the area denied the allegations that the males who hang out in the area are prostitutes.

"The guys dem whey congregate are friends who just hang out and talk, most of them don't have no home," he said.

He also explained that they have basically taken up residence in that area because it is the only place where they can really feel safe.

"If we go round deh so or back so dem wah kill we. Police, bad man, everybody wah kill we," he expressed.

Interestingly, he admitted that some of the homosexuals dress like women, however, he claimed that he only did so on rare occasions.

"Mi only dress so when mi a go out," he said.



Meanwhile, he told THE WEEKEND STAR that he knew that he was gay since he was 18-year-old and since then he has cut off all associations with women.

"Mi nuh feel say it right fi mi a go to man and a go to woman," he said.

When contacted, the New Kingston police confirmed that there has been an increase in the number of male hookers frequenting the area.

However, it was noted that from time to time the police carry out loitering operations which helps to reduce the numbers.
ENDS

This homeless issue is just a scar fast becoming a sore on our community and affects the health of our general advocacy and by extension our hypocritical presentation of unity to the world and then we go asking for tolerance when we are so contemptuous of the least amongst us. To think only two days ago we had International Day of Tolerance where I raised my continued concern for this population: 



Also on November 14, 2011 I also posted recent concerns and issues with other displaced men:


Homelessness/Displacement problems again .........


Peace and tolerance

H

The Dance of Difference, The New Frontier of Sexual Orientation

 

First Source
You can tell that Shirley Anderson Fletcher is going to be very honest as she explores the nature of prejudice in The Dance of Difference, The New Frontier of Sexual Orientation when she starts the book with this story:
CLICK HERE
I have been concerned about the oppression of racism and sexism for most of my adult life. However, I turned a blind eye to the oppression of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals until my fourteen-year-old son confronted me. I was forty-one years old at the time. He had overheard his dad and me laughing at a so-called 'gay joke.' He looked us in the eye and asked, "Would you really be laughing if there was someone gay in this room? Do you really think this is funny?" He looked at us long and hard before striding out of the room. I was mortified.

That was twenty-nine years ago. We made a commitment then to monitor our own prejudices and biases regarding gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. We've been intentional about building our awareness. And the reality is we still have a long way to go.

Shirley then employs a model called "Dialogue with Difference" for exploring this prejudice by presenting a transcript of a discussion about sexual orientation with a gay African American colleague, the Rev. Dr. Jamie Washington. That transcript comprises the middle section of the book, and it is revealing in many ways. This particular technique is based on the societal construct of dominance and subordination, but it turns that relationship on its head by permitting the subordinated group member in the dialogue to have the opportunity and authority to decide the focus of the discussion.

I was skeptical about this type of presentation but found myself drawn into the discussion and learning a lot about the issue and, like Shirley, my own preconceptions and prejudices.

This is the first of a series of books on prejudice by Shirley, collectively entitled The Dance of Difference. If you want a break from traditional fluffy summer beach reading, it is well worth your time.


Publication Date: April 15, 2011
It is rare for heterosexuals to acknowledge, much less write about, their own homophobia. This black grandmother who grew up in the homophobic culture of Jamaica in the 40's and 50's offers a moving look into the challenges faced daily by people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT) because of the learned biases, attitudes and behavior of heterosexuals. The author, a behavioral scientist, who migrated to the United States 30 years ago, shares examples from her early life experiences as well as examples from her long career as an organizational consultant in the United States and Europe. The centerpiece of the book is a spontaneous dialogue between the author and a gay pastor about the realities of life for members of the gay community. 

This is a standout element that sets the book apart. In a particularly valuable part of the book, the author describes common scenarios of heterosexual prejudice and bias towards LGBT people that will ring familiar with many readers. The responses she recommends will be useful in building relationships between members of the gay and heterosexual communities. Throughout, the author strikes a good balance between professional reserve and personal openness. She comes across as sincere, candid and open-minded.


She effectively uses her own life experience to demonstrate that we are not born with inbred prejudice. Rather we learn our biases from the culture in which we are raised and from well-intended people in our families and communities. She emphasizes that as adults, we have the capacity to move from indifference, to compassion, to support for human rights. This book will appeal to a wide audience that includes organization consultants and managers who are concerned about diversity and inclusion, as well as to educators and parents who are preparing children for a world in which we value and respect each other regardless of our differences.

Conscious choice The question is whether people make a conscious choice to be homosexuals. After all, why would someone willingly choose a path that is fraught with hate? That view ought to be weighed against how you exist in this setting for which the rest of the world defines you. "It is already a confusing time for many persons searching to define their sexuality," Anderson-Fletcher said, adding that she hopes readers will understand her journey as a heterosexual woman, see themselves in her, see that she was also at one point indifferent to gays, but has learnt to understand them. One would conclude that her views are unorthodox for a Jamaican. 

After all, the typical Jamaican has been reared in a culture that abhors lesbians and gays. But having lived in the United States of America with real experiences of race and gender discrimination, it was just a matter of time before her life of struggle with differences would lead her to be concerned about others. Since its April publication, the book has been well received. Many experts on the subject and persons touched by it have told her how helpful it has been. The turning point began with her then 14-year-old son who heard his father tell a homophobic joke and laugh about it. He challenged his father that he bet he would not have the same reaction were the subject of the joke present. "That incident made us stop, we never did it again," Anderson-Fletcher said. Her ongoing work in the areas of racism and sexism also influenced the change in her view of homosexuals. 

"They are a subordinated group who are treated badly in society. I also did some personal workshops with my peers to re-educate myself and that was also key to my development in the subject matter," she said. Her intention for the book which chronicles real-life case stories about the sadness, trauma and enormous suffering and pain endured by some homosexuals, is that readers will realise that gays are among our sons, daughters, brothers, friends, teachers and even ministers. "It is not a book about sex, it's about one aspect of the life of gay or heterosexual lifestyle - sexuality.

More from the Gleaner HERE

See the TVJ interview HERE

also read the first chapter 


also now see the uploaded interview on TVJ's Profile with Ian Boyne aired the 20th November 2011




Go HERE

Monday, November 14, 2011

Flawed Logic Of Anti-Gay Lobby (Gleaner Letter)

In response to the November 12th Gleaner piece by Shirley Richards on Jamaica Must Not Surrender Sovereignty new comer to gay Jamaican blogging B. P. Welsh has responded but first check out Miss Shirley's article and the response Flawed Logic Of Anti-Gay Lobby below. Also see on my sister blog GLBTQ Jamaica an interview with Ms Richards on the religious station Love 101Fm on the whole buggery repulsion matter and the supposed threat from UK Prime Minister David Cameron to remove aid.


Shirley Richards' piece from the Gleaner

Not being satisfied with the failure of the Commonwealth heads of government to arrive at a consensus on the matter of the repeal of sodomy laws within the Commonwealth, British Prime Minister David Cameron has taken the decision to withhold British aid from non-compliant nations.

Did we hear right, or were we mistaken? Is it true that our former masters are now calling on us to repeal laws that they are not in agreement with, or face the penalty? Is it that somewhere in the 1962 Jamaica (Constitution) Order in Council which facilitated our independence, there remains a hidden, residual power for Britain and its allies to manipulate our legislature as it thinks fit? What did Gandhi, Nkrumah, Manley and others fight for?

The effrontery of David Cameron and his allies is incredulous! (Incidentally, If Eric Williams were around, he surely would have made it clear to members of the Commonwealth that 43 from 54 leaves nought!) Thankfully, however, the very system which the British left us contained within it the right to resistance. That very same philosophy was the driving force of the struggle for the independence of America - government depends on the consent of the governed.

As has been many times said before, the retention of the buggery law provides guidance to us as a country between that which is acceptable and that which is not, in terms of sexual behaviour. It is the legal underpinning of the survival of the tradition of the heterosexual family. It is a guide to parents, children and to our public officials in the matter of sexual affairs. How could the homosexual lifestyle be in the interest of humanity when it leads to nothingness and is fraught with dangers both for the individual and the society?

HIV transmitting out of control

What makes the effrontery worse is that the scientific literature has indicated that in Europe generally "HIV transmission seems to be out of control in the MSM population". If David Cameron was really interested in our welfare, wouldn't he be urging us, with tears in his eyes, not to repeal our laws, as it would appear that by liberalising their laws Britain and its allies have made a grave error?

What is also of grave concern is that in these countries where the laws have been liberalised, there seems to be an emerging tyranny which penalises any expression of dissent of the lifestyle, even where such dissent is expressed privately. Just last month in England, father-of-two, Adrian Smith, 54, was found guilty of misconduct by the Trafford Housing Trust and had his salary slashed by £14,000 after saying on his private Facebook page that same-sex weddings in churches would be "an equality too far".

Neil Addison, an expert in religious discrimination law and a practising barrister in England, commented on this case, saying: "When I was a child, people in England used to say, 'I can say what I like, it's a free country.' That is certainly no longer the case in Britain today."

It's a very similar situation with the abortion issue. On November 15, an employment tribunal in London will begin to hear the case of Margaret Forrester, who was sacked from her job as a mental-health worker because she had shown a pro-life booklet to colleagues that said women suffer from mental-health consequences after abortions.

It is also expected that by December 5, the British Government will lift the ban on same-sex civil-partnership ceremonies in churches. (This was what Adrian Smith was concerned about). Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone is insisting that churches would have the freedom to decide if they want to offer same-sex services. However, the fear is that even if the scheme was initially voluntary, churches that do not agree to offer the services are "likely to be put under huge pressure to change their policy by campaign groups".

Not tolerated

With all due respect to Lord Gifford, QC, the situation seems to be the same in Ireland. At the time sodomy was decriminalised in 1995, it was argued by the homosexual lobby that they simply wanted to be left alone. However, since then, the lobby has grown into 'a rights industry', and now any criticism or even questioning of them and their continuous demands is not tolerated.

On Sunday, October 30, journalist Eamon Delaney, writing in Ireland's leading newspaper, the Irish Independent, referred to the "insatiable demands" of the homosexual advocates "for more and more recognition and identity". Mr Delaney expressed the concern that this will "eventually alienate mainstream opinion." http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/loud-and-proud-gays-want-to-take-over-rest-of-society-2920975.html.

It is just a matter of time before persons who hold contrary views on both the issue of homosexuality and abortion will have to flee Europe and the United States in search of safe haven. (Déjà vu?)

At the same time, however, one wants to make it abundantly clear that use of violence against homosexuals is absolutely wrong and must be denounced. All allegations of violence, including violence against homosexuals, must be thoroughly investigated by our security forces with the aim of bringing perpetrators to justice.

So up, you mighty nation! Have you forgotten who you are? You are Jamaicans, for goodness sake! Within your laws as they currently are is the key for the preservation of the family, the health of nations and the survival of the human race. So do not be ashamed! Do not be intimidated! You are on solid healthy ground!

Email feedback to sprichards@cwjamaica.com. 

Mr. Welsh's response:

Flawed Logic Of Anti-Gay Lobby

THE EDITOR, Sir:

The argument posited by certain members of the religious right and thenouveau intelligentsia that it would be illogical to repeal the buggery law in light of the disproportionate rates of HIV infection recorded among men who have sex with men (MSM) in epidemiological data is flawed.

The claim is that retention of the buggery law in light of the rates of infection is in fact prohibitive towards new infections and is ergo a societal good. This analysis is fallacious.

The buggery law is but one of many variables which exacerbate the systemic vulnerabilities of MSM to HIV infection. I would never propose that repealing the law would serve as a panacea; in fact, it is merely the first step in the right direction for government in the creation of a supportive social environment.

A fatal (though intentional) flaw of Marc Ramsay's and Shirley Richards' diatribes in The Gleaner on November 12 was the failure to recognise how the buggery law legitimises hostile attitudes toward sexual minorities and how its retention is a symbol of the complicity of government in the abuse suffered at the hand of misguided homophobes.

MSM are not disease vectors any more than another societal demo-graphic, but the vulnerabilities faced by this population can only be addressed through open dialogue .

BRIAN-PAUL N. WELSH

Brianpaul.welsh@gmail.com

St Andrew

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Prime Minister Andrew Holness on the UK AID Withdrawal threat on Profile (Repost from GLBTQJA)

 In a two part episode of Profile the second to be aired next Sunday hosted by Ian Boyne Prime Minister Andrew Holness made his first major interview on Prime Time and second overall as Prime Minister on mainstream television the first being on Smile Jamaica on the same Television Jamaica Station. The Gleaner carried a headline entitled Not Ready for Gays which suggested the Prime Minister was not ready to engage the issues associated with homosexuality in Jamaica and the so called threat levelled by The United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron to withdraw aid from countries that continue to host anti buggery/sodomy laws on their books. Many like myself think that Mr. Cameron's statement may have implications on the ground as the perception is that we are being dictated to by powerful nations. 


State Minister for foreign affairs Senator Marlene Malahoo Forte also of the Jamaica Labour Party had indicated that we will not be dictated to and that we are a democracy. She had also said in her short television interview that: "We are sovereign nations and each country has to be allowed room to work out issues understandably countries with an interest on an issue will bring pressure to bear on others but we are a sovereign nation and we are committed to protect our people need to work out the issues, There are a number of ways that the matter can be addressed if it is a matter that can be dealt with bilaterally then we can begin through the diplomatic channels but the issue has to be addressed from many angles there are issues on the ground that would require the input of the Jamaican people .................. it doesn't matter how many laws we legislate we cannot legislate how people think, I think its time to invest more in educating our people I think that is the more appropriate starting point but it is also important for a discussion to b started in an earnest way to deal with the real problems that arise out of this issue."



The came the million dollar question and issue as posed by Profile's Host Ian Boyne:

Ian Boyne: 
"You have talked about continuity with some of the policies of the Golding administration one of the famous pronouncements of former Prime Minister Bruce Golding um... was contained in that  BBC Hardtalk interview that famous Not In My Cabinet statement is that one of the policies you intend to continue? there are gay Jamaicans who believe that in the words of President Obama that they are being discriminated against because of whom they love, are you willing to look at the buggery law ?

PM Andrew Holness:
You've asked a very important question .... it's two parts ..um .. continuity is a significant code word for the investment and international financial markets it is used strictly as it relates to ensuring that our international financial partners are comfortable with the transition it eliminates uncertainty from the market and we have used that term effectively. clearly the opposition has tried to make more of it than what it really is but you will  note that the recent standard and poors statement was very clear about their concern about a change of government and therefore continuity is a code that they understand very well ..... clearly for economic and fiscal policy .. that's very important, in my inaugural speech it was very clear that I took a pragmatic approach to governance I listed out all the things we have done which we have made significant achievements in which we must continue and I've also listed out things that are work in progress things that we would want to do for example advancing the micro-economic agenda for growth that's significant ..... now let's get back to your question .... I just wanted to raise this continuity issue (interspersed with Ian's push for a direct answer) we have heard the statement made by the British Prime Minister and i have to wrestle with that in my mind as to how to treat with it (Ian - "as a young transformational leader") yep, um .. and let's be clear, let me just tell you where I am, um I'm a libertarian on the social side but I'm fiscal conservative on the economic side, right, so my view on this matter is that Jamaica must meet it's human right obligation and the human rights obligations are set in the United Nations fora by conventions and by an large I believe we have done fairly well in meeting them, I think that ... particularly we have to do more for children, I think so, now  .... in terms of civil rights so let's make the distinction there are human rights which are basic rights everybody has the right to life, freedom of association (Ian concurs) and the state must protect those rights and I think our police by and large have tried we have issues no doubt about human rights but anyone looking on our force will say that within the last ten years, I think, I mean we're not there yet but at least we still .... (Ian interjects "our laws still allow them to break into the homes of homosexuals and arrest them")  but we're coming as I say .... and I am saying we must ..... um ... at least acknowledge that we must meet the standard of human rights. In terms of civil rights now this is the rights that the country gives in its constitution ...um right across the world there are different permutations and combinations of civil rights um Jamaica has just enshrined civil rights in the Charter of Rights .... and we are constantly engaging in the debate ... what we have to give credit to in Jamaica is that the debate is going on ...

Ian Boyne:
Are you going to look at the Buggery Law?

PM Andrew Holness:
which is what I am .... I'm building the context, somehow you think I am not answering the question (Ian: "I understand what a difficult what a difficult thing that is for a country like Jamaica") no, no, no I want you to bear with me (Ian: "Yes I will I will") I want you to to to to bear with me ....... I have to take the time to explain it, because it can be (Ian: "They're watching us all over the world, not just Jamaica") so let's be clear so Jamaica has to embark on an expansion and deepening of our civil rights that is just as important as improving our economics, how that is done? must be where government facilitates the discussion and government through its parliament must be prepared if these matters are to come before it through its parliament to take action ... now here is what I am saying we have to be very careful, our democracy here must be respected we have a democracy it takes maybe longer than some other democracies to make decisions but we have demonstrated in our parliament the capacity to take difficult social issues and address them, we have done that with for example .... um ....capital punishment I remember that debate um ..... was a no confidence .. it was what we called a a a (Ian interjects: "A conscience vote") forgive me a conscience vote of which I participated in that debate and almost everyone in parliament did but we were able to freely express our views

Ian Boyne:
But you stood in the majority though?

PM Andrew Holness:
No, my vote was not for (Ian: "The parliamentarians stood for the majority?") but but but my issues is if your argument is your parliament stands with the majority of the opinion of the people, is your parliament wrong? 
(Ian: "But that is with universal rights, there are some cultural specificities") and I am saying to you that if those but but  (Ian: "Certain cultures allow certain things") Ian we just said that, as it relates to human rights, those are universal those are set in convention and we must meet what is set in conventions by virtue of the united nations as far as possible (Ian: "We should ok) then there are civil rights which are determined within the context of your parliament of your your civil society enshrined in your constitution  

Ian Boyne:
What if the UN and Europe particularly begin to interpret human rights and begin to add gay rights as a part of fundamental rights? 

PM Andrew Holness:
But now you've gone into speculation

Ian Boyne:
Europe is moving in that direction     

PM Andrew Holness
But I'm saying that you're still gone into speculation, you know listen we acknowledge um ... the interconnectedness of the world and we are not unaware of the fact that the position is tied to support and aid, of course but the same countries that preach um ... strengthening democratic institutions can't on the other hand ignore democratic institutions and I want to be clear that Jamaica has to take a progressive path but it must respect its own institution in how it gets there (Ian: "Sometimes those two are in contradiction you know?") but that's the beauty of it (Ian: "Sometimes taking the progressive path might need leadership") be clear, leadership can't go without the people, so leadership must, the debate must be engaged, people musts say I am willing to do this or willing to do that I am not willing and the debate must go on, what I want the international community to understand is that Jamaica is growing as an institutional democracy and if you hear how police talk which would be very heartening where a statement was made and immediately the commissioner came and corrected it shows you that institutionally you see things are moving, it may be incremental, it may not be as fast as they want it to but I ask that the support of a process, it is a democratic process, it is the process they have asked us to engage on, support us on that process.  

Ian Boyne:
The appeal is going out, Prime Minister Andrew Holness answering the tough issues 

Interview ends for part two next Sunday evening at 6pm

UPDATE November 9, 2011
Here is my audio on a Gleaner article entitled "Not Ready for Gays"

See what you make of it.

Also see from sister blog GLBTQJA Blogger edition - 

Holness Dithering On Homosexuality ..............


Have a referendum on homosexuality(Observer Letter) ..... but homosexuality is not illegal


Peace and tolerance

H