Shirley Richards, Contributor

Richards

Prime Minister Bruce Golding's claim on a recent BBC interview that he would not appoint a homosexual to his Cabinet has elicited a flurry of articles supporting or criticising his stated position. Below we publish two articles offering contrasting perspectives on the prime minister's comments and the wider issue of how homosexuals should be treated in the Jamaican society.

One of the principles by which many live in this 21st century is that "it is forbidden to forbid". Hence, when Prime Minister Golding, while in England, boldly reiterated his stance against having homosexuals in his Cabinet, there were howls of protest, particularly from persons who subscribe to the philosophy that choice in sexual affairs should be unencumbered. The homosexual debate is highly illustrative of the clash in the varying values of the West.

In his book Time for Truth Dr Os Guinness recounts portions of a lecture given in Singapore, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union. "What we in Singapore want is the modern world, not the West. We want the Asian way. We want to follow Confucius, not Christ. Having given rise to the modern world, the Jewish and Christian faiths have now been reduced to ruins by the modern world." Asian countries, the lecturer argued, "should take a different path. They should exploit the opportunities of capitalism, industrialised technology and telecommunications but within the setting of their own beliefs and cultures."

In this regard, Jamaicans have said, over and over again, that we do not regard the homosexual lifestyle as being an acceptable alternative to the heterosexual lifestyle and, thus, we object rather strongly to any form of imposition of this lifestyle on us as a people. Like that Singaporean lecturer, we would rather exploit all the opportunities of the modern world but within the setting of our own beliefs and culture; such beliefs and culture having been shaped by those Christian principles which have now been discarded by the post-modern western societies.

Transform the leadership

Some, however, while admitting that it is a fact that most Jamaicans do not want this lifestyle think it is wrong for the prime minister to exclude such persons from his Cabinet. It may be that the prime minister is more perceptive than we give him credit for in realising that the lifestyles of people at the top influence the lifestyles of others. "Transform the leadership and the people whom they are responsible for will be transformed", we are told. It would, therefore, be only consistent if, as the prime minister says, he does not want to lead the country down a certain path, for him to be careful concerning his Cabinet appointments.

Maybe it would also assist our deliberations if we took note of some relevant incidents in other countries. On May 14, 2008, Crystal Dixon, associate vice-president of human resources at the University of Toledo, (USA) was first suspended, then fired, for having written a letter to a local newspaper in which she raised a protest in response to a previous article released by the paper that compared the discrimination of homosexuals to that of African-Americans. It has also been reported that Catholic schools in Britain are under attack by the government, at the urging of homosexual lobbyists, for refusing to bow to pressure to implement 'anti-homophobic' bullying policies in schools. As a consequence, one of the prominent British gay rights group, Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association, has called for "the Catholic Church to be stripped of its educational establishments." (See LifeSiteNews.com).

will of the minority

These types of incidents are now so frequent in Europe, USA and Canada that one wonders whether in these countries it is not now a matter of the will of the minority being imposed on the majority with the state being used as the chief executive agency! Incidentally, in response to questions posed to her in the House of Commons on February 19, 2008, Meg Munn, parliamentary under-secretary of state at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, made it clear that in countries where same sex relationships are illegal, Foreign and Commonwealth Office ministers and officials have been actively lobbying for decriminalisation. (See the House of Commons Hansard Report)

It may also be good to remind ourselves of the importance of the buggery law. The importance of this law is far more fundamental than affecting the actions of men in their bedrooms. This aspect of the law (S76 and 77 of the Offences Against the Person Act) provides legal protection for heterosexual lifestyle as being the preferred lifestyle of the country as a whole. Emanating from that we can safely declare that the definition of 'family' in Jamaica should be firmly slanted towards a heterosexual definition with a rejection of any slant towards a homosexual definition. We can also object to any change in the definition of 'sexual intercourse' which would allow for anal sexual activity. We can also insist that our values and attitudes material and other types of materials used in schools be firmly slanted towards a heterosexual definition.

For many of us, therefore, we are very grateful that the prime minister was man enough to have reiterated his principled stance in spite of the pressure of being interviewed by the powerful BBC. However, having begun on a good path, he needs to go further to insist that his Cabinet members model good examples in their family lives. He needs to encourage them to choose marriage instead of Suzie Qs, to be faithful to their wives and to be seen taking their families to church and to places of recreation. The 'common good' of the country must be cherished over and above our individual preferences and choices. In bringing moral clarity to this country he would be doing this country the type of good that it so desperately longs for and, hopefully, helping us to once again distinguish right from wrong in a world in which the distinction has become so hopelessly blurred.

Shirley Richards is head of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship