JLP Pandering to Homophobic Crowd to Gain Political Mileage

A picture is worth a thousand words, this video will be worth 10x that. The integration of church and state, the total disregard for persons rights to religious freedom.

The world must see what's happening in Jamaica.

Jamaica's Reaction to Statement By Portia Simpson Miller XI

Mullings slams Simpson Miller over buggery law review plan

'No nation that seeks to move away from God's words can succeed'

BY MARK CUMMINGS Editor-at-Large Western Bureau cummingsm@jamaicaobserver.com

MONTEGO BAY, St James — Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) candidate for West Central St James Clive Mullings has blasted Opposition Leader Portia Simpsom Miller for promising to review the country's buggery law, should her party return to power.

Armed with a Bible, a stone-faced Mullings urged scores of Labourites at a mass meeting in Montego Bay's historic Sam Sharpe Square on Thursday night to unite against the repealing of such a law.

Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) candidate for West Central St James Clive Mullings greets party supporters at Thursday’s mass meeting in Sam Sharpe Square, Montego Bay. (Photo: Mark Cummings)  1/1

"We must understand that for a nation to be blessed, for a nation to grow, we cannot depart from God's words. No nation, no nation that seeks to move away from God's words can succeed," he declared.

Quoting scriptures, Mullings pointed the large gathering to Genesis Chapter 19: verse 24, citing the reason why "the Lord poured down sulphur and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah."

Simpson Miller, in responding to a question raised during the final political debate convened by the Jamaica Debates Commission on Tuesday night, said that should the PNP return to power, she would initiate a review of the buggery law.

She also said that her party would not prevent anyone from becoming a member of her Cabinet based on their sexual orientation.

Recently, several countries, including the United Kingdom and the United States, have suggested that they might withhold aid to countries that are not doing enough to protect the rights of homosexuals.

But Mullings, an attorney, urged the horn-blowing supporters on Thursday to take a stance, arguing that the United Kingdom's position is contrary to what we have learnt and know under the word of God.

"We are no longer a colony of Britain, so if that's the way they want to go, let them go, but let us not depart from God's word," he argued.

He told the jubilant supporters that next Thursday's general election should not be viewed only as it relates to the creation of jobs.

"We must understand carefully that the choices we make must not be only as it relates to employment, it should also be regarding the moral direction of your country and the future for your children," the JLP candidate argued.

"So Labourites, Jamaicans, when we go out to vote think seriously about the direction of your country. I implore you to understand that while we are here at this point before general election, don't misunderstand what we are facing. It is not just the economy, it is in regard to the future of the country for our children and you must now decide whether you want a nation that will be overtaken by those who have punitive lifestyles or whether you are serious about building our country."

Earlier this week during a mass meeting in Annotto Bay, St Mary, JLP candidate for West Portland Daryl Vaz also criticised the opposition leader for suggesting that a future PNP government will review the buggery law.

Several other speakers, including JLP deputy leader Desmond McKenzie, also blasted Simpson Miller for her stance on the buggery law during Thursday night's meeting.

Read more: http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/No-nation-that-seeks-to-move-away-from-God-s-words-can-succeed_10451336#ixzz1hUFfIJQd


Mullings Rips Into Gleaner For Supporting Portia

Bobby Montague (left), JLP deputy chairman, has the attention of Darly Vaz (centre) and Prime Minister Andrew Holness at a JLP meeting in St Mary on Wednesday night.

1 2 3 >

Janet Silvera, Senior Gleaner Writer

WESTERN BUREAU:The Jamaica Labour Party's (JLP) candidate for West Central St James, Clive Mullings, has blasted The Gleaner for its editorial which congratulated People's National Party (PNP) president Portia Simpson Miller for her announcement that a government led by her would lead a review of the buggery laws.

Addressing a JLP mass meeting in Sam Sharpe Square in Montego Bay on Thursday night, Mullings, with his Bible in hand, tore into The Gleaner.

"I want the editor of The Gleaner to listen to the word of God. For a nation to grow and prosper, it cannot depart from God's word," said Mullings, as he quoted several scriptures and argued that no nation which moves away from God's plan can succeed.

"God brought down fire and brimstone on Sodom and Gomorrah," added Mullings.

Criticising the United Kingdom, which he said has taken a position to do something contrary to the word of God, Mullings noted that Jamaica was no longer a colony of Britain.

"So if they (the British) want to go in that direction, let them go."

Grabbing the Bible tightly in his hand, Mullings stressed that it was critical for all Labourites and other Jamaicans to understand carefully the choices they are making regarding the moral direction of the country, and the future of their children.

The issue of the Buggery Act came up on Tuesday evening during the leadership debate, when Simpson Miller responded to a question on the subject.

She said then that it was time that the act be "reviewed" and all members of the House of Representatives provided with an opportunity to vote on the matter based on their conscience.

Janet.silvera@gleanerjm.com

Jamaica's Reaction to Statement By Portia Simpson Miller Part IX

The following letter to the editor was published in the Jamaican Gleaner.

Christians Should Not Discriminate

THE EDITOR, Sir:

There is so much talk with regard to the 'don't ask, don't tell' statement made by the leader of the Opposition during last Tuesday's debate.

She was very specific. She said that she would not pry, and that she would make decisions based on ability. She also stated that she would review the buggery laws in consultation with the Jamaican people. That was a very diplomatic statement.

I am, however, stunned by the response from some among the body of Christ. These betray the very foundation of the Christian principles. We should not discriminate against any human being because of sexual preferences. We can debate the issue from now until judgement day, we cannot win, for all of us are sinners.

Many among us fornicate, commit adultery, steal, lie, we could go on and on. Even though we cannot understand the deviant sexual behaviour, let us acknowledge that we all have to account for our sins.

The million-dollar question is, how would Christ deal with the homosexual? He did not treat the lepers or the adulterous woman as outcasts. Let us pray for our brothers and sisters.

VERNA GORDON BINNS

theashton@cwjamaica.com

PO Box 123

Our Christian Nation and Human Rights

Jamaicans have recently gone into a flurry over the values and morals we hold as a Christian nation. It is unfortunate however, that though many of us proclaim to be Christians we participate in or refuse to condemn and fight against issues in our society that obviously goes against our Christian values. We must protest all forms of immorality, not just the issue of homosexuality. We must refuse to sell out Our Christian Heritage (http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20110709/letters/letters7.html) on all issues.

There are a few issues that jump to mind, that we as a Christian nation should be protesting against.

1. Sexual immorality. Fornication, adultery, lusting and rape are against Biblical principles. Since they are against our values as Christians these should be listed as crimes and placed upon our laws.  We should prohibit all forms of activity and advertisements that may cause persons to commit these forms of sin and crimes.
2. Gambling. Gambling is against Biblical principles, for this reason it should also be prohibited. All forms of gambling should be outlawed. Horse racing that takes place on a Sunday (if you believe Sundays are for worshiping) or a Saturday, should be made illegal. As a Christian nation we should not condone these activities.
3. Consumption of alcohol and smoking. Since our bodies are the temple of the living God, we should ensure that, persons do not destroy this temple, through destructive activity including smoking, illicit substances, and consuming alcohol to the point of drunkenness.
4. As a Christian nation with Christian principles we should up hold the worship of the One True God. The God of the Christians, Yahweh. All other religions should not be allowed to practice their beliefs, as they are not worshiping the one true God. Islam, Hinduism, Judaism, Buddhism, Rastafarianism, other forms of Spirituality, should be outlawed.

These are just four of a range of issues plaguing our society today. As true Christians we must tackle all, and not become selective in the issues we speak out about.

Of course I am not against human rights for GLBT folks (I’d be against myself), this just goes to show that there are multiple issues that should be tackled and not just the issue of homosexuality. It highlights the hypocrisy that exists.

Now the more serious discussion lies in the human rights issues we as GLBT Jamaicans are fighting for.

Since the passage of the New York bill on gay marriage, there has been an increase in letters both pro-gay and anti-gay. One of the letters spoke of the economic gain of legalising gay marriage; I respect that view, I however prefer to tackle this issue from the human rights perspective, particularly as we will start hearing the 'selling out' arguments, as above and in this letter to the editor- No interest in gay tourism. 

Jamaicans have gone into a flurry of Biblical quotes and drawing upon the Bible for why Jamaica will never allow gay marriage. For many, Jamaica is a ‘Christian nation’ having ‘Christian principles’. This post is not to argue the Bible, and what it says or does not, it is to state a few simple facts.

Jamaica is a democratic society. A definition of a democratic society is one where adults hold other individuals, and those in these organizations who are responsible for making decisions and taking actions, fully accountable if their decisions or actions violate fundamental human rights, or are dishonest, unethical, unfair, secretive, inefficient, unrepresentative, unresponsive or irresponsible. For gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) persons in Jamaica, this definition of democratic society is evidently not played out. There are daily violations of the human rights of GLBT persons, and the bodies that should ‘serve, protect, reassure with courtesy, integrity and proper respect for the rights of all’ including the police force and the government are unresponsive, inefficient, and unfair.

Jamaica is a society in which the church and state are separate. Though the major religion in our country is Christianity not all persons in Jamaica are Christians, and the rights of those persons should be respected. Requiring that all persons adhere to the Christian standard and Christian principles go against the right to freedom of conscience and thought given to all under the Jamaican constitution.

The rights which GLBT Jamaicans are advocating for are basic human rights (based on us being citizens of the world), and the rights given to us under the Jamaican constitution (based on our nationality as Jamaicans); including but not limited to the right to life, liberty, security of the person, the enjoyment of property and the protection of the law; the right to freedom of conscience, of expression and of peaceful assembly and association; the right to the respect for private life and privacy of home.

The Charter of Rights says that the enjoyment of our rights granted under its Charter should not ‘prejudice the rights and freedoms of others’. Imposing Christian beliefs upon all persons prejudices these rights and freedoms.

Members of Lesbian Gangs You're a Disgrace

Hey readers. Recently there has been articles in our local news papers about lesbians and lesbians in high schools. The latest one being Lesbian gangs terrorise schools in today's (June 12,2011) Observer. Below is a letter I wrote to the Dear Editor section of the Gleaner let's see if they will publish this one this time. Also if any of you know how I can send letters to the Dear Editor section of the Observer I'd be grateful for that information. Leave me your comments and thoughts. 

_____________________________________________________________________

I am a Jamaican. I am a lesbian. I am a Christian. I have values and morals. There are other lesbians just like me Christian, there are also those who are spiritual and yet still there are those who though neither spiritual, Christian nor religious; have values and morals.

Many persons within society would prefer that our high school students, lesbians, gays, heterosexual males and females, abstain from sexual activity. The reality however, is that they don’t.  There is not enough discussion on sex and sexuality to counter the early sexualisation of our young people through music, television and radio shows.  Parents and churches even shy away from the topic of sex referring to it in abstract terms.

On the issue of lesbian gangs and sexual assault against females perpetrated by other females, we should not be treating this any differently because the two parties are of the same sex, in this case female. What difference is there between a male sexually assaulting a female, a female sexually assaulting another female, a male sexually assaulting another male? Isn’t it a sexual assault just the same? What makes any of them worse? Is it because some persons in society view same sex relationships and activity as bad?

There has been recently, an increase in articles about lesbians in our high schools. The latest being lesbian gangs in high schools.  I dare speak on behalf of the Jamaican lesbian community. We do not agree with lesbians bullying or luring others into sexual acts. It is wrong. Just as how a gentle man does not inappropriately touch a woman against her wishes, neither do respectable lesbians. It doesn’t make you any more attractive, it doesn’t make you any more respected. If you are in a clique that encourages such behaviour get out of it, you are a disgrace to the entire lesbian community, and a disgrace to the wider GLBTQ community.

There are respected and noble lesbians in society, they may not be visible in Jamaica, however they are present, behaviour such as this does not put you in that category.

I am etc.,

Alexis Jarvis

Lesbian Christian and Human Rights Activist

Published Response to Peter Espeut

Hey readers as promised, here is the version that was published in the Gleaner.

It's reposted in it's entirety, and can be found at the main webpage which will also have the comments, you can find that by clicking on the name of the article.


Lesbians Do Have Morals!
Published: Saturday | April 16, 2011                17 Comments


THE EDITOR, Sir:

Peter Espeut, in his column 'The right to discriminate' (April 8), began his defence against the non-inclusion of a non-discrimination clause against the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Jamaican population by drawing upon the fear of Jamaicans.

A church that does not condone homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, transgenderism cannot, by any account, be forced to admit these persons into its clergy, as that would be an infringement on their rights. The church is a private body governed by its own rules; the same goes for schools employing openly LGBT persons.

Mr Espeut says that by including a clause of non-discrimination, it may cause "young people ... [to believe] that homosexuality and heterosexuality are equally acceptable 'alternative lifestyles'." Why, Mr Espeut, would anyone choose to live a life that they have heard over and over will lead them to hell, a life that would endanger their life?

anything goes

I do not know, Mr Espeut, if you are saying that "anything goes" is the characteristic of LGBT persons, or if such persons are amoral. If that is what you are saying, may I ask you how many LGBT persons have you met outside the stereotypical profile many have of LGBT people? Let me introduce you to a lesbian who has a moral compass: me. I am a lesbian, a Christian, an overcomer of a sexual crime. I am not amoral, I have values, I have a concept of right and wrong, I have moral principles.

Get it right, Mr Espeut, all heterosexuals aren't party animals and promiscuous beings, neither are all lesbians, bisexuals, gays, and transgenders.

I am, etc.,

ALEXIS JARVIS
Lesbian Christian and Human
Rights Activist

Jarvis@p2102442.pubip.peer1.net

Too Many Deaths for the First Part of the Month

I am currently at a loss for word, I am very much distraught one of these guys was a friend of mine. This is the exact reason we need protection under the charter of rights, and the repeal of Sections 76, 77 and 79 of the Offences Against the Person Act.

Visit my fellow blogger brother's post on the three deaths this week.

The Tragic Loss Of Three Icons In Less Than A Month ……..

The Irrationality of the Existence of the Buggery Law

In 2009 with the sexual offences bill being debated, Ernest Smith, South West St Ann Member of Parliament, made a few comments regarding the characteristics of homosexuals and the severity of punishment for buggery. Smith further called for J-FLAG to be investigated for conspiracy to corrupt public morals. Bruce Golding (Prime Minister) in distancing himself from Smiths’ comments said, "I disagree with the comments he (Smith) made about the rights of persons who advocate for liberation of laws relating to sexual offences, to facilitate, to allow persons the right of choice in their sexual practices" . With this do I start.

If persons have the right of choice in their sexual practices then why does the buggery law exist? The buggery law (sections 76, 77 and 79) of the Offences against the Person Act goes against the very notion of the right of someone to choose what sexual activity or practice they will engage in.

There are two points that are advanced for the validation, of keeping this law on the books. There are:

1. To protect our children. Nonsense. Removal of the buggery law will not increase the possibility of our children being sexual targets. In a sexual offence case recently a JLP minister was charged with buggery. That man should have been charged with rape! Rape is forced sexual activity against someone’s will. The protection of children, women and men should not rest on the continuance of this law. It in fact reduces the sentence of the perpetrator.

2. It is against Christian moral. Now for the people (of which there are many) who seem to have forgotten that Jamaica is not a church state, the reason the buggery law is kept on the books cannot rest on Christian or any other religious argument. The Charter of Rights (section 21) guarantees each person the right to freedom of conscience (which includes freedom of religion); to bind anyone to a law because it is your religious view - that they are wrong and in this case immoral - is a travesty and a violation of that person’s constitutional right.

"If we start to yield; if we start to liberalize in the direction that strong organized lobby would insist that we should, then where do you draw the line?" the prime minister said. Again Mr. Golding like many opponents of human rights for gays, you seem to want to create a link between the human rights and the sexual rights of homosexuals and those in the GLBT(Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgendered) community, with bestiality and pedophilia. Bestiality and homosexuality are two different things Mr. Golding. I do not condone bestiality. Homosexuality concerns a same-sex, human to human relationship, not human-animal relationship; the same goes for pedophilia; pedophilia “is a psychological disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children” (World Health Organization, Section F65.4). There are pedophiles who are attracted to young girls and pedophiles who are attracted to young boys. Those are different from adults who are attracted to adults of the same sex.

Again the Prime Minister says, "We have a duty to protect people in the country, and therefore, we will never support or condone either the acts of violence or threats of violence or intimidation in any shape or form against persons because of their sexual preferences or lifestyle,” yet it is known that persons are harassed, abused, and been recipients of violence due to their sexual orientations; and the Charter of Rights was recently passed without protection from discrimination for persons of the GLBT community. You have failed Mr. Golding, you and your government have failed at your “duty to protect the people in the country”, including the GLBT community. You need to be held accountable, and don’t laugh it off like you did with Mr. K.D Knight recently (Mannatt/Dudus Inquiry).

Mr. Golding has said that as part of a menu of sexual legislation in the new bill being considered; provision was being made to sentence those persons who engage in buggery carried out in circumstances similar to rape or grievous assault to life. May I advise you Mr. Brilliant Prime Minister, that to be able to effectively bring about that legislation, it means you will need to acknowledge that there are instances where buggery is not committed in circumstances similar to rape or grievous assaults.

"We will never start peeping in anybody's bedroom to see what they are doing within their own privacy. We will never start hounding down people because they may have lifestyles that we would prefer did not exist." As much as many would prefer that other sexual orientations did not exist, Mr. Golding, you do not have any authority to dictate who a person is, what sexual preference they may chose, or what orientation they may be born as. Regarding the ‘peeing..in bedroom[s]’, let me make you aware that per section 19(2)(b),(c) and contrary to what you, and many others purport, police and any other such person acting under the authority of the law can kick down your door, or break through your window, for the purpose of defending (as Mr. Smith said) the public morality, or from preventing a crime from taking place (buggery).

One question I will ask to finish off my article is for Mr. Golding, a member of the security forces, and/or an attorney at law. If two persons (male and male, or male and female, or female and female) are engaging in anal sex, and the neighbours break in on them and begin to inflict injury; when that is reported to the police:

1. Will the persons engaging in anal sex be charged for buggery?

2. Will the police only charge the neighbours who broke in and inflicted harm?

3. Will the police charge both sets?

If the answer to the above is #3 then, it means the law is ineffective, discriminatory, and a stumbling block to the access of protection.

What say you?

My Response to Peter Espeut's column ‘The Right To Discriminate’

The following is my response to Peter Espeut's column ‘The Right To Discriminate’ (April 8,2011). I had to edit and shorten it to send it to the editor. The letter that follows is the complete unedited letter. If my letter is published then I will repost it here for you as well.

_______________________________________________________________

Mr. Peter Espeut in his column ‘The Right To Discriminate’ (April 8,2011) began his defense against the non-inclusion of a non-discrimination clause against the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Jamaican population, with the fear factor of the Church being forced to admit gays into clergy and schools being forced to admit openly LGBT persons as guidance counselors.

Mr. Espeut and fellow thinkers (including Shirley Richards) draw upon the fear of Jamaicans in furthering their (at times) baseless arguments. A church that does not condone homosexuality, lesbianism, bisexuality, transgenderism, cannot by any account be forced to admit these persons into their clergy that would be an infringement on their rights. The church is a private body governed by its own rules; the rules of the state (so long as there is separation) cannot be forced onto them. The same goes, as it regards schools employing openly LGBT persons. A private school, not funded by the government can set their own rules and chose whether to accept such persons or not. For example, if a school is operated by Seventh-day Adventists, then non-Adventists or even non-Christians will be required to abide by the rules of that school. If however, the school is funded by the government of the land then the laws of the government will also govern how such an institution is run.

“I do not believe that two consenting adults, of whatever gender, should be criminalised for having sexual intercourse with each other in the privacy of their homes”, why then Mr. Espeut should you not support even the very basic call of the removal of Sections 76, 77 and 79 of the Offences Against the Person Act? Those sections can allow persons to be targeted, dragged out of their homes and beaten, and/or jailed. “Personally, I do not think that homosexual relations are wholesome”, I partially agree with you Sir, however I must say that there are many heterosexual relationships out there that are not wholesome; no single side of the fence has completely wholesome relationships.

You say Mr. Espeut, that by including a clause of non-discrimination, it may cause “young people not yet self-actualised, who are still developing a consciousness of themselves and their sexual identity… [to believe] that homosexuality and heterosexuality are equally acceptable 'alternative lifestyles’”. I personally believe that due to music culture many young persons, experiment with sex in all forms (it has always happened), do not confuse that (experimentation) Mr. Espeut with identity/orientation. Why, Mr. Espeut would anyone chose to live a life that they have heard over and over will lead them to hell, a life that would endanger their life? Why Mr. Espeut, would I chose to live a life that has caused me to be the target of a sexual crime? No Mr. Espeut, you need to stop and think it over.

Bestiality and homosexuality are two different things Mr. Espeut. I do not condone bestiality. Homosexuality concerns a same-sex, human to human relationship, not human-animal relationship. Though you have not said both are the same, persons reading your article and persons who despise homosexuals usually love to equate the two, this is the clarification. The same goes for pedophilia; pedophilia “is a psychological disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children” (World Health Organization, Section F65.4). There are pedophiles who are attracted to young girls and pedophiles who are attracted to young boys. Those are different from adults who are attracted to adults of the same sex.

“We can decriminalise homosexuality”, then make the call Mr. Espeut, or is this just talk? Make the call to remove sections 76, 77, and 79.

“Modernist, neoliberal people reject even the idea of having norms and values - and anything goes”, I do not know Mr. Espeut if you are saying that this is the characteristic of LGBT persons, I am not sure, Mr. Espeut, if you are saying that we are amoral. If that is what you are saying, then may I ask you how many LGBT persons have you met outside of the stereotypical profile many have of LGBT people? Let me introduce you to a lesbian who has a moral compass; me. I am a lesbian, a Christian, an over-comer of a sexual crime. I am not amoral, I have values, I have a concept of right and wrong, I have moral principles. Get it right Mr. Espeut, all heterosexuals aren’t party animals and promiscuous beings, neither are all lesbians, bisexuals, gays, and transgenders.

_____________________________________________________________

This Buju Banton Thing

Popular reggae artiste Mark Myrie better known as Buju Banton, was found guilty in a Florida court, on three charges on Tuesday, February 22. The artiste was found guilty of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five or more kilogrammes of cocaine, attempted possession with the intent to distribute cocaine, and using the wires to facilitate a drug-trafficking offence. He was found not guilty of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug-trafficking offence.(On the Ground News Reports).

This conviction brought to the fore the ignorance of many Jamaicans. The discriminatory slurs and comments uttered by Jamaicans can be found all over the internet. In particular On the Ground News Reports on Facebook, below is a sample of the comments on their page:

How people believe that Buju Banton was set up by gays and that his conviction was coloured by the 'all powerful' gay lobby is beyond me. My opinion is that if someone is guilty and found so by a jury, then they are guilty. Many Jamaicans in blaming gays, refuse to see the logic in the fact that no one but Buju Banton is to be blamed for his own predicament. If you're not inclined to do something then you will not be caught doing it, a simple example (my comment posted on On the Ground News Reports):

"...If you're not inclined to certain things you won't be lured into the trap. If a man nuh gay nor have the inclination him nah go find himself in "compromising position(s)" with other males. Therefore boasting or not, entrapped or not HE placed himself in the cross hairs. Stop playing the blame game."

There are some other Jamaicans who share the same sentiment:

Dear readers, do you believe that Buju Banton was unfaily convicted based on 'Boom Bye Bye' and the 'Gay Agenda' or by his own actions?

World AIDS Day Event at JASL Kingston

World AIDS Day, Wednesday December 1, 2010

The Jamaica AIDS Support for Life (JASL) held a Candle Light Vigil on World AIDS Day at its Kingston location. The event got underway at approximately 7 p.m. with the opening prayer done by Father Monsignor Richard Albert.

We were given a short history of JASL (done by Althea Blake of the JASL Board), the audience learnt that in its initial days, the organisations focus was on persons infected with HIV/AIDS.  JASL was the fist organization to offer hospice care for positive persons, to die with dignity, today the organisation provides much more than that, including: prevention, treatment and care services.

There were various items throughout the programme all worthy of being acknowledged:

• Mona High School- Song 
• Tarrant High School – “Real Talk” 
• Richard Dell- Dances 
• Tanya Stephens (impromptu) – Singing A capella “Do You Still Care” and a short talk 
• Fabian Thomas- Poem in dedication to Howard Daley and Steve Harvey 
• Jamaica Youth Theater

The Message titled “Hope in the Face of HIV/AIDS” was given by Rev. Dr. Shelia McKeithen senior minster at the Universal Center of Truth for Better Living. She used HOPE as an acronym to bring across her message:

• H- health- this is a privilege don’t abuse it. 
• O- opportunity
• P- positive- have a positive attitude 
• E-expect- be expectant 

At the end of her message, Rev. Dr. Shelia McKeithen pledged $100,000 to JASL for 2011 from the Universal Center of Truth for Better Living.

The symbolic candle lighting ceremony was done by representatives of various parts of society:

• Rev. Dr. Shelia McKeithen 
• Dr. Somse- UNAIDS 
• Dawn Marie Roper- PANOS 
• Pat Watson and Joy Crawford- Eve for Life 
• Dane Lewis- JFLAG 
• People Living with HIV (PLHIV) 
• Shirley Lee- Disabled Community 
• Nurse Gowe- Hunter- JASL Community 
• Karla Ellis- Country Director- USA Peace CORPS 
• Hermence Matsotsa- USA Peace Corps (international volunteer community) 
• Careen Russell & Colleen Russell- Local Volunteer Community 
• Jackie Ingledew- Private Sector Community 
• Jamieann- Orphan Vulnerable Children (OVC) 

Just before the reading of the quilts Tanya Stephens was called to perform. Though unexpected she did not disappoint, giving the crowd- “Do You Still Care” acapella. She then spoke briefly on the issues of respect, advocacy and discrimination, stating that the government cannot call for tolerance and non-discrimination when it’s laws are the grounds from which intolerance and discrimination is launched, she then went on to call for the removal of ‘certain laws’.

The names on the quilts were then read, these quilts were created over the years in remembrance of those who have died from HIV/AIDS. Because of their deteriorating condition the decision was taken to let them remain on the inside, in the JASL gallery were persons could view them after the ceremony. There were 11 quilts:

• The Curtain 
• The Tree 
• The Shell 
• The Jamaica Flag 
• The Map of Jamaica 
• The Mask 
• Between the Lines 
• Into the light 
• The Tile 
• The Sun 
• Star Hall 

The item performed by the Jamaica Youth Theater deserves a bit more than just the note above, not because it was better than the others but because it spoke to the issue of transgenderism- an issue which doesn’t get much attention from within the LGBT Community nor from the outside.

The quilt for 2009-2010 titled: “The Journey of Life” was unveiled by Rosemarie Hinds and Nurse Ochid Gowe-Hunter.

Following the Vote of Thanks by Yvonne Artis- Programme Assistant- candles were distributed and lit and the audience led by hosts Dara Smith and Jaevion Nelson, sang the JASL theme song “That’s What Friend are For”.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This was my first year attending any World AIDS Day event and it certainly won’t be the last. I’m sorry I didn’t have a video camera to record some of the amazing item performances. I have my criticisms, but I will save those for a future post. The event generally speaking was good and I applaud JASL Kingston.

JASL Gallery 2010

Jamaica Youth Theater

Tanya Stephens- "Do You Still Care"

Tanya Stephens

Hosts Dara Smith (CVM TV Journalist) and Jaevion Nelson (JYAN)

Jamaica Youth Theater

                                   

    The Audience- Lighting candles and singing "That's What Friends are For"

Uganda nightmare and Jamaican's ignorance

On The Ground News Report on facebook posted an item about the recent publishing of the names and photographs of gays in Uganda. This particular news paper published for the second consecutive time, the names and photographs of some homosexuals living in Uganda, Sexual Minorities Uganda (SMUG) sought an injunction against the paper. Uganda’s high court ordered Rolling Stone to stop publishing the names and photographs of people it says are gay, ruling that the publication is violating their right to privacy. 

The initial comments didn't surprise me, indeed as much as P.M. Golding would love to live under a rock and proclaim to the world that Jamaicans are loving tolerating people there are still the many who would take the same steps and encourage violence against GLBTQIs by doing the same thing the Ugandan paper- Rolling Stone- did.

One particular commenter seriously proved his ignorance and had me ranting and raving for a while before calming down in order to write. 

This particular commenter went ahead to voice a statement that many others would have voiced: "What has happen to the freedom of the press, what other people names can they now not publish" Hmm let me think for a while.... freedom of press? There is also the right to privacy and security of the person, I do believe that these two rights overrides this particular freedom. 

When the exercising of your particular right is going to put another person or group of persons into danger, or infringe upon their right then there has to be a balance with the exercising of that right. This doesn't apply only to these kinds of rights any right you can think of can infringe on someone else's right, that's one reason there are laws that govern our actions, it regulates society and the behaviour of society creating and maintaining (or ought to) a balance for the exercising of each right. 

Now I would seriously want to label this commenter an idiot but then is it not his right to express his thoughts? But shouldn't he exercise that right to the extent that it doesn't infringe on someone else's right? So if he believes and expresses that gays are evil and should be imprisoned that is his thought, BUT, if he INCITES others to go out and kill gays because they are evil and nasty then he has by his action and exercise of his right infringed up the right to life of a gay person. 

I understand the strong religious sentiments that are usually attached to the debate of homosexuality, however the hypocrisy that is entangled with it all would be amusing if it weren't that lives were at stake.  

Some comments voice the desire for the same to happen in Jamaica. And then what will happen? Bloodshed! What will that achieve?

P.M. Golding and those of you who believe that Jamaicans are oh so tolerant its time for you to stop being an ostrich take your heads out of the sand because you've left your backside unprotected to the possible consequences of your ignorance. 

Somebody Tell Me this

Since when is gay rights special rights? Doesn't it still come under civil rights? This charter of rights issue has been stalled for years, and now that it has once again been brought up for completion we have some more issues coming in. The people from the Lawyers Christian Fellowship (Jamaica) have made the issue of basic human rights into a issue of gays wanting special rights and marriage rights.

The LGBT community in Jamaica is calling for our rights to be acknowledged. There has not been one call for gay marriage, but this is what they've jumped on. Just look at this article 'Unholy union' - Charter could sanction gay marriage in Jamaica - Christian lawyers. This same articulated fear from 2006 is still present today and is played upon by these people. You self-righteous, fearful people all we are calling for is our civil rights, our basic human rights. 


"The religious groups are also concerned about the inclusion of a privacy clause in Section 13, Subsection 3 of the Charter of Rights, with the words 'respect for private and family life, privacy of the home'." (full article here) The privacy clause is another big fear, why? What is so wrong with LGBT people wanting respect for privacy and privacy of home? Since when is it the government's, and Lawyers' Christian Fellowship and homophobic people and so many other persons' business to be peeping through the windows and under door bottoms and through key holes to see what TWO CONSENTING ADULTS do in THEIR bedroom? 


Shirley Richards president of Lawyers' Christian Fellowship  noted (in the above article) that "The rights pertaining to freedom of conscience, which is currently granted under Section 21 of the current Constitution, have not been fully repeated in the charter". She also added that the revised charter does not explicitly include the right to provide religious instruction, to students; as an example. 


Isn't Jamaica a democratic society made up "OUT OF MANY ONE PEOPLE"? There are many persons in Jamaica who are not Christians, we have Muslims, Hindus, atheists and so forth. Why should this group demand an explicit inclusion for them to be able to give such instruction which may be against the beliefs of these people, while at the same time they want to deny LGBT citizens their rights? It doesn't add up people. 


Now the fear that these persons expressed are legitimate but their main fears that they won't be able to preach out against homosexuality is in my opinion not well founded. The right to freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of beliefs and conscience is not, I believe an absolute right. Absolute would mean there would be no restriction on any of these rights. Can you imagine persons having the right to incite violence without knowing that they will be held accountable? That is where I believe those rights should stop; there is a line between belief and incite. You can believe that someone will go to hell for being gay you can preach that if they don't repent they will go to hell. But preaching, and encouraging that they be burnt, killed, and/or tortured is wrong and there is no way around that.


These persons seem more inclined to strike fear into the hearts of Jamaicans than they are in speaking the truth, speaking compassion, tolerance, communication. Where is the Christianity that you ought to display? Come on you're people of God, but this kind of behavior isn't Christ like. Just remember this, there are LGBT Christians all over the world, praying for you. We are a part of God's family.  It is too bad that using scare tactics is the method that you have to resort to. 

Tek Care

Alexis

It's too painful

I read a blog post today, every time I read these posts it brings me down, but today having read it it just makes me feel like crying, crying out to God. I feel so hurt, disappointed. My first reaction was anger but now it's just tears. This corrective rape Jesus, oh my God when will you reach down and help us. This is one more too much.

The article can be read at Gay Lesbian Bisexual Transgender & Queer Jamaica (here)
Please note a correction however to the first part "...perform on the three bastards..." this should actually have been two.

Tek Care  

Alexis

Good God (*shakes head*)

COUPLE BEATEN AT HOME FOR FREAKY SEX

The above is an article form the Jamaica Star.

This is past disappointing, upsetting disgusting, I can't come up with more words. The nerve, these men have to have gone into the couple's home and then allegedly beat them for having "freaky sex" IN THEIR OWN HOME! How in God's name did these people end up in the couple's house much less to BEAT them for some thing private,  A PRIVATE CONSENSUAL ACT. Then after that to rape the woman in the same method for which she and her male sex partner were beaten?? What kind of foolishness was this? And then they talk about homosexuals being the most sexually perverse? Since the cultural thing to do would to beat and kill LGBTs then why they don't kill rapists too? Since the Christian and religious thing to do is preach fire and brimstone then I wonder if they will do that when they hear of rapes? Hypocrisy.

Tek Care  

Alexis

Jamaica Gleaner Letter: Making Scapegoats Of Gays

I believe I wrote a blog on something along this line, not so well put together mind you, but I think I did. Let me look, I did but I was doing more ranting that talking (here). The below is a letter written by Mr. Maurice Tomlinson. Same thing I've been saying; well said Mr. Tomlinson.

Jamaica Gleaner Letter: Making Scapegoats Of Gays

Published: Monday | April 19, 2010

The Editor, Sir:

Shirley Richards of the Lawyers Christian Fellowship has so far not commented on the recent spate of domestic violence being perpetuated against our women by men from all walks of life, including entertainers. She has instead, chosen to decry the 'deceptive' Walk for Tolerance, put on by Jamaica AIDS Support for Life, which sought to increase awareness of the need for tolerance for groups vulnerable to HIV/AIDS as an effective way to combat HIV/AIDS.

Love and tolerance

She has been silent on the beating and killing of women. She apparently spurns the biblical injunctions of love and tolerance of the marginalised, regardless of acceptance of their lifestyle. She utterly rejects legal and constitutional principles about the recognition and protection of rights for the most vulnerable in society. She takes on the gay issue because it is easy.

And then there are those like J.M. Fletcher (Gleaner, Saturday, April 17 ) who, preposterously ask gays to leave Jamaica. This is neither possible nor probable. Hitler tried the same thing during World War II with disastrous results for the German society and the world at large. The world is still paying the price for Nazi intolerance.

Jamaica's intolerance and homophobia has also blighted the world in the form of our violent music, and the world is now reacting by banning our artistes and implementing hate-speech legislation.

For those who think that gay rights are not civil rights, look carefully at the wording of the international treaties created after WWII in reaction to Nazi brutality. Courts as far flung as India, South Africa and Brazil have found that gay rights are indeed civil rights.

Jamaica needs to focus on the real threat to its peace and security, which is a poorly performing economy, instead of seeking to make scapegoats out of a marginalised and vulnerable group. That would be Nazism all over again.

I am, etc.,

MAURICE TOMLINSON

maurice_tomlinson@yahoo.com

Montego Bay St James

Tek Care  

Alexis