There’s a hole in the moral ozone and it’s getting bigger. – Michael Josephson, American ethicist.
As Barbados celebrates its 45th anniversary of national Independence and asserts itself as a sovereign country, some would consider it ironic that at this time in our history a world power could be trying to dictate our agenda by telling us what we should or should not do if we want to continue to benefit from its largesse.
On the other hand, there are those who would argue that if Barbados truly wants to become a developed country by 2025, a smeared human rights record in relation to laws about buggery is a major stumbling block to how we would be perceived in the world.
On Brass Tacks Sunday last November 27, I had the distinct pleasure of moderating a call-in programme in which the focus was on whether the call of Prime Minister David Cameron for Barbados and other countries in the Commonwealth to bring their laws on homosexuality in line with Britain, if they wish to continue to benefit from foreign aid, is acceptable.
I took issue with a news item on VOB92.9 FM the next day in which one of the panellists, political scientist Peter Wickham, asserted that our laws on the matter were backward. I wish to discuss this issue within the context of sovereignty and the whole question of development.
While I respect Mr Wickham’s views on the matter, I fail to see why we should blindly follow the dictates of Britain, or any other world entity for that matter.
Mr Wickham kindly shared some statistics which suggest that close to 80 per cent of Barbadians have no problem with maintaining the status quo on this matter.
How independent are we if we accept others’ notion of development that is driven by a warped morality?
The British parliament has gone soft on the issue and seems willing to accommodate any stance on the matter. Does Mr Peter Wickham want us to accept that development must be amoral? The sovereign countries in this region have a different concept of the ethical bases of homosexuality and cannot embrace the notion that it is normal for human beings to promote male-to-male sexual relationships.
I was disgusted by the news that when New York accepted the practice of same-sex marriage, hundreds of couples lined the streets and thronged the ministers in order to marry their “partners”. I saw grandmothers and grandfathers in their senile years kissing and hugging like 16-year-olds.
In June 2011, lawmakers voted to legalize same-sex marriage, making New York the largest state where gay and lesbian couples will be able to wed and giving the national gay rights movement new momentum from the state where it was born.
It is hoped that the gay rights advocates in Barbados are not using this as an entry point strategy that will later see other requests being made or foisted upon us in the Caribbean.
I was even more incensed when [in the last WEEKEND?NATION] Barbados’ newest knight Sir Errol Walrond spoke in similar terms when he said: “One of the things that I am disappointed in is that our governments, not only here but up and down the Caribbean, whilst paying lip service to getting rid of stigma and discrimination, refuse to do anything about changing laws that discriminate against people.”
This stalwart in the field of medicine and surgery cited homophobia, stigma and discrimination as major obstacles still standing in the way of combating the AIDS epidemic. Sir Errol, who was accorded Barbados’ highest award for his work in the field of medicine, argued for a change of this island’s laws affecting the practice of homosexuality.
I want to state my position very clearly. Every individual has the right to choose his lifestyle. I might even agree that it could be considered a human right.
I used to think that one’s gender was ostensibly defined at birth.
A male or a female was distinct in the biological, physical, emotional features. I accept that there are instances when there are hormonal imbalances that may make a male look like a female or vice-versa.
However, I am diametrically opposed to any notion that suggests that it is normal for boys to love boys and girls to love girls with erotic love.
As an educator, I make it absolutely clear to all my students that the school is not in the business of promoting homosexuality. In fact, no hate nor homophobia is encouraged but I tell my boys that homosexuality is not an option.
I tell them that God created Adam and Eve and there was no Steve!
Our concept of development and our understanding of sovereignty must of necessity differ from that of countries across and Europe and North America.
We affirm our right to self-determination as a sovereign state and even if there are those who see it as backward, let us move forward without such people.
The church and civil society cannot compromise their positions on this matter.