IT IS NOT SOPHISTICATED to talk about God in public affairs. If, as a token gesture, He must be mentioned, then all references to Him should be politically correct.
I choose to be neither sophisticated nor politically correct in addressing the ungodly appointment of what is essentially an independent LGBT world police commissioner. The June 2016 controversial appointment by the United Nations Human Rights Council of an “independent expert on protection against violence and discrimination against persons based on their sexual orientation and gender identity”, resulted in much tension between the Western nations of the world and a bloc of African and Asian countries, with the Caribbean holding the power to tilt the final vote one way or other.
Discussing the issue in the British House of Commons, Sir Alan Duncan, the Minister for Europe and the Americas, made it clear that every attempt would be made to sway the vote in favour of the appointment: “Every single diplomatic post where we have an ambassador and representation has been absolutely, clearly and unequivocally instructed to try to persuade their host country to vote the right way in the General Assembly.” (To read the full debate, google UN debate on the Independent Expert for the LGBT Community.)
Apparently, the persuasion was effective. The vote in the General Assembly was carried 84/77 with five CARICOM countries (including Barbados) abstaining and three voting along with the Western countries. Most interestingly, St Kitts and Antigua, which had on November 21 voted along with the African-Asian bloc, had by December 19 changed their vote. It does not take a mathematician to see the role played by the region: 77 + 8 = 85.
My objection to the post stems from my belief in the sovereign God who created man and woman and who denounces homosexuality. Secondly, my objection is levelled at the interference in the sovereignty of “impoverished” nations (thanks, Sir Alan), the lack of international consensus and the unscientific assumptions underlying the very nature of the post.
Violence and discrimination against anyone for any reason is wrong. However, these terms have been stretched beyond recognition in the law courts of those materially rich but spiritually impoverished nations that have embraced sexual rights ideology.
Further, the concepts “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are based neither on objective fact nor justifiable assumption. Rigorous scientific studies have consistently indicated that there is no “gay” gene. Yet, in an unholy departure from reason, the nations have embraced the concept of “sexual orientation”.
The independent expert, Professor Vitit Muntarbhorn, has pledged to wield his mandate in every country “under the sun and under the moon”. Commonwealth countries that hold fast to sexual morality can therefore expect an unleashing of true violence and discrimination against individuals and institutions based on their moral orientation and faith identity. This will no doubt be expedited by coalitions of lawyers offering pro bono services to “vulnerable groups”. One such Caribbean group was formed in December 2016.
Having remained on the fence with regard to the appointment of the independent expert, the Barbados Government can at least be decisive now in demarcating boundaries. What is, and is not, violence and discrimination? To what extent will gender identity and sexual orientation influence social policy and shape social institutions from 2017 and onwards? The country needs to be absolutely, clearly and unequivocally instructed.
– DR VERONICA C. EVELYN
