A Response to a Gleaner Commentary: 'CAUSE' Editorials And The Culture War

I felt moved to respond to this commentary piece from one Alfred Sangster whose poorly thought through article just irked me as I sipped my tea this morning, I hope the Gleaner approves my comment but in case they do not it sits below the article excerpted:

'CAUSE' Editorials And The Culture War

By Alfred Sangster

The Gleaner editorial of July 03, 2014 asks the question, In whose CAUSE? and answers the question in the body of the editorial. Essentially, the editorial is sounding the battle cry against the consortium 'Churches Action Uniting Society for Emancipation' (CAUSE).The article attacks the evangelicals and is strong for the gay-rights movement. The war that The Gleaner has declared is against, "those who are intent on turning back a liberalism that sees same-sex orientations not as a fundamental right, but as an intolerable aberration." There has been a second supporting editorial of July 8, 2014 by The Gleaner titled: 'Good tactic, wrong CAUSE', which was obviously prompted by the fact that the CARICOM leaders at their recent meeting deferred approval of the anti-discrimination document (PANCAP) which has a strong gay-rights agenda. The successful lobby of over 140 organisations against the document must have sent a strong signal to the CARICOM leaders and a jarring message to The Gleaner writers as well!

This so-called culture war is driven by imperialists whose methods have been no different from those of earlier years. Jamaica has had its challenges of culture wars before with threats to life and liberty. The most recent historically was in the '70s when Michael Manley launched his democratic socialism - a cover-up for communism - on the Jamaican people. But Jamaica rejected this foreign imperialistic doctrine and the People's National Party was rejected in an unprecedented way. The Gleaner editorial writers seem to have forgotten their paper's history. It was the same Michael Manley who led a demonstration at The Gleaner's gates with the promised threat of 'Next Time'. The Gleanercried out to the country for help, and people rallied around and bought shares in the company. I was one of them.

WAKE-UP CALL

For our present time, the Brendan Bain issue was a new wake-up call to both the Jamaican society in general and the Church in particular. The communist threat, now history, has been replaced with a new imperialistic threat to the country in the militant gay-rights movement in what the editorial described as the new culture wars. This new value system is characterised by the cleverly disguised use of 'rights' to bypass existing laws and practical questions of right and wrong. In President Obama's reflections on racial and women's 'rights' on issues of freedom, equality and justice, he was correct and argued from the highest ethical and moral value system known to mankind. When he added the rights of homosexuals to his list of rights, he moved America down the slippery slope of moral decay. So the Christian community and many elements of civil society have risen to battle this new imperialism and its challenges. These are the issues and this is the CAUSE.

It is about a lifestyle which has the following sexual elements.

It is an unnatural lifestyle. The plant and animal kingdom have their male and female genders for propagation, renewal and replacement

It is an unhealthy lifestyle. The Brendan Bain statistics - internationally confirmed - noted the realities of the enhanced threat to sexual diseases

It is an unproductive lifestyle.

The gay lifestyle strikes at the heart of the family and the sanctity of marriage currently entrenched in the Jamaican Constitution as a union between one man and one woman, The buggery law is not about prying into people's bedrooms; it strikes at the root of the justice system and creates a false value system.

The firing of Professor Brendan Bain was just such an example. A large number of splinter groups described by The Gleaner headline as 'duppies' led to the false premise that Professor Bain had lost the confidence and support of his constituents.

STRIKES at NATION'S HEART

The gay lifestyle strikes at the heart of a nation's ethical, moral and spiritual value system.

The movement is characterised by some of the following elements.

The tactics of the imperialists remain the same as those of the old slave masters - use any available resource to subdue, or buy out the 'natives',

Use the media to induce 'the hate speech concept' and attack those who stand for Christian values.

Use underhand and deceitful methods to influence the young. The recent sexual material in the children's homes is an example. The interchanges between Carolyn Gomes, Kay Osborne and the Jamaicans for Justice raises the question as to who is telling the truth.

It is clear that The Gleaner editorialists have captured the imperialistic gay-rights agenda, quite the opposite of the struggles of the '70s. What is the policy of The Gleaner's board of directors on this issue? What of the voice of shareholders who supported The Gleaner in the '70s. We need answers.

ENDS

My response:

Dr Mr Sangster,

Please step out of the dark ages and step into the present reality, the procreation argument does not wash anymore as ONE person can be made produce and embryo via stem cell research/manipulation and other scientific methods for persons who cannot have children naturally or same sex couples who do not want to go the route of a surrogate.

Because you are not attracted to the same sex does not make it unnatural for someone's whose experience is different from yours but clearly you wish to IMPOSE your beliefs on others yet pretend that you hate he sin but love the sinner which is a silly argument.

Anal sex as implied in this poorly thought through and under-researched article is NOT the untidy affair as your active imagination would like to think as your mind seems stuck on the "sex of it" instead of the orientation of the individuals (mostly in this case gay/bi men) but bear in mind heterosexuals also practice anal penetration, some for contraceptive means as evidenced by medical doctors who have spoken publicly on the issue. Walk into any pharmacy and there are anal healthcare products similar to those that women use for their own issues.

Please list the actual page(s) that had the so called offensive lines in the JFJ sex education manual as I find many as yourself who are in strong opposition have failed miserably to be specific on that matter but are up in arms at a report by a newspaper, they did bypass the CDA but the reporting mechanism and monitoring visits by the CDA should have picked up in the 6 or 7 months the activity was taking place a point that I have yet to see you self righteous voices elucidate.

You wrote:

"The movement is characterised by some of the following elements. The tactics of the imperialists remain the same as those of the old slave masters - use any available resource to subdue, or buy out the 'natives',Use the media to induce 'the hate speech concept' and attack those who stand for Christian values."

Where is the proof of this when this very newspaper and others has allowed your piece to be published (as nonsensical as it is), so how can it be blocking freedom of speech and you, Rev Peter Espeut, Dr Wayne West, Shirley Richards and others over these many years have contributed articles and so on unimpeded or blocked by these so called imperialists?

The fact that a rally that basically incited hate & reawakened old homophobic feelings was even allowed to occur to supposed fight against as you put it "imperialists" when this is a MINORITY lest we forget is not clear to you yet? ..... it is interesting that very freedom of speech which you defend so stoutly is now being used by you and yours to suppress a minority, wow 15th century England all over again but this time in little Jamaica and then you claim the victim-hood card to justify your arguments ........ are you for real?

Finally stop clouding the atheistic or secularist push with that of the LGBT rights advocacy, not all voices who are atheist are homosexual that is what is causing a lot of this nonesense.

ENDS

also see

The Gleaner Editorial to Anti gay Group Jamaica CAUSE - Good Tactic, Wrong CAUSE

More Pastoral Inappropriateness & Under-aged Victims... Silence from The Selective Religious Anti Gay Fundamentalists?

Two Good Letters on Gay Person-hood & Paedophile Homosexuality Conflation

Jamaican Gay Unions? Hanna Says Ja Not Ready For Same-Sex Families Despite Int'l Redefinition

The Gleaner Editorial to Anti Gay Group - In Whose CAUSE?

Jamaica CAUSE issues Veiled threat to Govt to not Repeal The Buggery Law

Many more miles to go on understanding and just sheer sensible reasoning it seems

Peace and tolerance

H

Stand Up To Same-Sex Lobby says Paul Kokoski .....................

So foreign influences who are opposed to homosexuality continue to get air time and space in local media spewing their neatly worded diatribe and coining or reusing so called terms like theophobia which speaks to a fear of gods or God's wrath or religion but here the writer tries to paint a picture of anti - Christian moves by the gay lobby as if to ask for or promote same sex rights will some how affect existing rights for other persons.


Have a read of the letter and see:

 

THE EDITOR, Sir:

Recently there has been an orchestrated effort on the part of homosexual activists like Dr Stephen Moreton to legalise homosexuality and homosexual marriage throughout the Caribbean. Most of these people are not from the Caribbean but are trying to impose their sordid lifestyle on the Christian Caribbean islands.

People should be made aware of the fact that there is no 'gay gene' and no scientific proof that homosexuality is innate. Homosexuality is, in fact, an abnormal behaviour. Ironically, the homosexual lobby often tries to project their own disorder on heterosexuals by prejudicially labelling them 'homophobes'.

Dr Francis Collins, who received the Presidential Medal of Freedom for his work sequencing the human genetic code, has stated that homosexuality is not genetically "hardwired". Homosexuality, like contraception, is contrary to natural law because it thwarts the natural generation of life.

Marriage is an institution that predates civilisation, ordained by God, and exclusive to one man and one woman who are given the responsibility to procreate the human race, and to nurture, educate, and pass on shared values and mores to their offspring.

To redefine marriage to include same-sex couples is to strip marriage of an essential component, namely, the ability and obligation to procreate. This would render marriage meaningless and open it up to endless revision and redefinition.

Gay marriage is a threat to religious freedom and conscience rights. There are already incidents in Canada and the United States of religious adoption and foster-care agencies being pushed out of work, and small business owners being fined or sued for not accommodating same-sex couples.

Town clerks and other officials with objections to participating in same-sex union ceremonies or to the granting of same-sex marriage licences have been told to find other jobs.

Once a state recognises same-sex partnerships as marriages or the equivalent, naturally the argument is made that in family-life classes in schools, this has to be taught to be a valid partnership. Religious parents who do not want their children to be indoctrinated in beliefs contrary to their will be out of luck. They will be branded and labelled as bigots. This is already happening in Canada.

Christians and other people from traditional faith communities are being called in a new way to have courage. The problem today is not homophobia but theophobia - a hatred by some of God, faith, religion, and the Church. The public affirmation of this prejudice is the hallmark of ideological totalitarianism.

PAUL KOKOSKI

pkokoski@shaw.ca

ENDS

This dishonest premise where he repeatedly puts forward in his letters to newspapers all over that "Gay marriage is a threat to religious freedom and conscience rights" coupled with the disruption of the family is a lie in my view as it does not take away from any existing rights for heterosexual couples. In fact I dare say if gay couples marry, adopt and raise children it in no way damages or blights their growth, we have seen undisputed evidence of this where same gender loving couples raise hetersosexual children. Maybe we could adopt some of those abandoned or homeless ones locally left behind by procreation indiscretions or "accidents" 

When LGBT groups or human rights entities ask for gay marriage rights as far as I am concerned it is about the state recognizing the union so as to effect benefits already allotted to heterosexual married couples such as pension benefits, state insurance (where allotted), death benefits, legal divorce proceedings, probate of wills in case one half of the pair passes away, wealth and assets sharing after death or divorce as per relevant state statutes etc. Anti gay lobbyists such as this letter writer make it seem as if heterosexual couples are going to be denied any of those rights and benefits they already enjoy when they sign on the dotted line of a marriage certificate as literally it is at that time and subsequently the registering of that marriage/union at the local registrar office or similar structures that puts into motion all those state benefits and legal coverage for wedded persons.

To present this farce or create hysteria of gay marriage affecting humanity or procreation while making gay lobbyist to be anti Christian principle is a an outright dishonest practice and is what ticks persons off and maybe in fact lead them to become such in order to avoid any confrontation, so they dismiss both the so called Christian individual who is fanatically obsessed as this letter writer is and all that (s)he espouses (we have our local ones too) or stand for including God and sadly many LGBT individuals do not bother to separate them and have become weary of the diatribe, in effect giving atheists and by extension radical anti Christian persons gay or straight more ammunition, believe it or not there are gay Christians who are progressive thinkers and persons like me who were in the church but struggled with the question of my orientation versus my status with God, finally realising God loves me no matter what my orientation is and the need to revisit spiritually and theologically this matter of homosexuality and Christian life.

The question of sexual practice and choices can be argued hereinafter, do we for example continue in celibacy or explore life and love with one faithful partner and not go down the road of multiple partners? Those are the questions fanatics like Paul Kokoski should consider instead of worrying about marriage rights denial for same gender loving folks. Did Paul for example really have an issue with homosexuality while working Rome? a question that was looked at on a previous post on my sister blog Gay Jamaica Watch: 

Did Apostle Paul actually accepted Christian homosexuals?

The notion that marriage must not be re-invented is a farce as marriage to day in all its aspects has been reinvented and reshaped repeatedly be they the romantic elements, the financial, the spiritual, gender roles/partner responsibilities as per societal norms and even how states recognise unions and accord benefits have changed radically over time, there were days when in Palestine and those parts where women were and in some cases still are subservient to men, couples do not exchange vows but a woman is pegged to her husband for life while he can have as many wives as he sees fit. Dowry practices still exist in India and other societies. Even in biblical days David the Psalms writer had concubines, Solomon had concubines yet married as well yet those men were used by God for his glory, what about the controversial love between David and Jonathan while carrying out the instructions of God for leading his people? What about the inappropriate relationship between David and Bathsheba? we do not hear these anti gay pundits bringing related pointers in their arguments or pronouncements.

Procreation is no longer a matter of sexual relations or copulation between the opposite sexes anymore there are medical advances that allow other methods for creating, growing and carrying a foetus including surrogacy for those persons who cannot bear children naturally or as an option for same sexed couple wishing to become parents but do not want to use their own bodies. As I have said before in previous posts what a wonderful job we are already doing in terms of procreation by Paul Kokoski's standards here, ever climbing divorce rates, thousands of missing children, most born out of wedlock, hundreds of boys wiping wind-shields daily at stop lights and those same religious pundits/fanatics pass them in the vehicles with windows wound up and tinted yet we have the most churches per square miles with very little social outreach for these vulnerable populations, indeed the most churches per square miles we have yet we are having ever increasing numbers of homeless homo and heterosexual populations alike plus others in abject poverty especially the elderly per square inch on our city side walks and towns and golden aged homes who are abandoned, where are the numerous or matching social work numbers to meet these issues? yet there is this grand attempt to stop private consenting adults from having their rights with big bucks being spent in some instances to do so, lest we forget that full paged ad in the Gleaner estimated cost $JA250, 000 money that could have been used for some outreach or donated to a home. We have also seen the zeal at which conservatives fund other anti gay action in Uganda: 

In The Life Series: Coalition & Allies (anti gay conservatives & Ugandan links)

Mr Kokoski needs to take a trip to Jamaica and let us take him around to see the REAL WORLD. He needs to stop pushing this ultra conservative garbage on us from afar.

Peace and tolerance

H

Shirley Richards & The Jamaican UK Foster Parents (The Johns) on Love 101 FM ............. on buggery

Mr and Mrs Johns (Above) had said they could not tell a child homosexuality was an acceptable 'lifestyle'

A Christian couple opposed to homosexuality had lost a battle over their right to become foster carers earlier this year in the UK.

Eunice and Owen Johns, 62 and 65, from Derby, both Jamaicans who moved to the UK said the city council did not want them to look after children because of their traditional views.

The pair, who are Pentecostal Christians, say they were "doomed not to be approved". they appeared alongside Lawyers' Christian Fellowship spokesperson anti sodomy laws decriminalization advocate Shirley Richards. The topic of discussion aired on the Love FM 101 weekly program sponsored by the Jamaica Theological Seminary was the recent comment and or threat by the United Kingdom Prime Minister David Cameron on the withdrawal of aid to countries who do not remove or repeal anti sodomy/buggery laws on their books.

Miss Eunice Johns one half of a Jamaican couple who have lived in the United Kingdom for just over forty years said that the couple wanted to continuing running their foster care activity while they were full time employed in total they fostered around fifteen children from the early nineties. They had another business outside of that which was short lived so in 2006 the couple decided to foster care as a business but when they went to sign up and go through the legal wranglings they were naive to the sexual orientation law, " ...we didn't know there was a sexual orientation act ...." she continued " we were so naive and so is a lot of Christians, we seem to think that politics has nothing to do with us, well politics has everything to do with us because its affecting us as parents, we applied to foster just to be told we had to go the line of an assessment and while we were going down there was a question, no it wasn't a question it was a scenario, they the, the social worker er um put a scenario to us she said, what if a child of eight comes to you and tell you they were homosexual what would you tell them? so I said I don't think a child of eight would know their sexuality but they said yes, so I said well I couldn't tell a child of eight that it is alight to be homosexual, she said you would have to, you would have to tell children it's alright to be homosexual because these issues that children has when you do not explain to them what is happening and then it can mess them up later life. 

So I said morally and spiritually as a Christian I couldn't tell a child it's alright to be homosexual and we left it there, but this social worker was dominant that she really wanted me to say that it's alright, she even told us that even if we got through the foster care we couldn't take the children to church, we couldn't take them to church either so that's another thing and we have to tell them it's alright, so later on we decided then we didn't want that social worker anymore because we didn't like the route this was going, cause we didn't know there was a sexual orientation act, she told us later on of course and so we went to a panel and the panel, we told the panel our story that as Christians we can foster children but we cannot tell them it's alright to be homosexual cause we don't believe it ourselves so we would be telling a lie and then said, they thanked us for coming and then later on it was about two weeks later we got a letter saying thank you for withdrawing your application."


Mr. Johns was asked to add to the above and he continued that he felt bad after looking after three generations he explained how the fostering worked, He said when the orientation matter was raised he said although they were bible believing Christians they would have worked with the social worker however the law was brought in through the back door in 2006.

Shirley Richards past President of the Lawyers' Christian Fellowship, LCF when asked about her point of view she began by saying that people were clamoring to do what they want to do in the privacy of their bedrooms but the host interjected that the current Prime Minister Andrew Holness said that what happens in private has public effects to which Miss Richards agreed: 

"Absolutely, it is naive to think that is all that is wanted, in every country and you know we have one learned QC (Lord Anthony Gifford) who mentioned Ireland that in Ireland um the anti sodomy laws were repealed by his interventions but the same very thing is happening in Ireland in every country in which these laws have been repealed what has happened is that um Christians are being impacted and so for example in the United Kingdom the Catholics have had to close down their adoption agencies (host interjects - "cause they are against the whole thing of telling children ...") what I find interesting about the Johns that they didn't realize the world around them was changing until they came in contact with the system. (host - "so the system can be very big? so you realize that Christians in Jamaica and outside of and not only Christians but others who are necessarily for if they are not aware of what is happening the thing can come on us overnight and you don't even know")

Eunice Johns agreed: "it came to England overnight, we didn't realize cause we had fostered before we had fostered 15 children we didn't know about the new sexual orientation act."

The host of the program before going to the break set up the stage for the discussion hinting to the effects on countries who have "legalized homosexuality" she also tried to present a tolerance card by saying "we are not talking about people shouldn't have their rights, we not going against people who shouldn't have their rights but what would legalization do in Jamaica, would it prevent the paedophiles from buggering our little boys?"

After the break it was instructive to hear the host of the program mention in a question she posed describing us as "The homosexuals" and "The Gays and lesbians" she said that persons were touting for the legalization of homosexuality. She again after the break repeated her stance on her version of tolerance, "I just want to make it very clear here we are not by any chance saying that if anybody knows of anybody who is involved in homosexuality they should be destroyed, they should be beaten, they should be mobbed, I've had to work with persons like that," Shirley Richards concurred "In fact we want to say that that type of response is absolutely wrong (host - "exactly") and we want to condemn it" (host - "if you know of anybody at all it is not in your right to call out for anything and want to make that very clear.") Ms Richards ended "Absolutely" The host continued in saying she lectures on mental issues and she drew inference to suicides, mental problems, HIV/AIDS high incidence and relationship problems in the same gender loving community in countries where homosexuality is legalized.

Mrs. Shirley Richards answered the following: "....one point I need to make though is that what our law penalises is anal penetration, you know, it's sodomy which is penalised by our laws in Jamaica, there is no law saying, you nuh the law just goes straight to that."

The host however either not understanding what was pointed out by Miss Shirley or that was a gratuitous move repeated a question posed before imputing that homosexuality is illegal, "Would legalizing homosexuality prevent paedophiles, because I've heard the report on the news the victims support unit that many of the little boys age 12 years old they need therapy, would would legalizing this stop anything like that?"

Shirley Richards responds: "I can't see why, I can't say that there is any direct correlation between the repeal of that law and a lessening in the incidence of abuse of minors, I can't see why, I can't see that logically that would follow, I really can't see it, what is needed is for these people, these men to be brought to justice, you know as you mentioned there is still a problem in these countries, look um there is a football coach who was who was, who was fired from his job what was it? at University of Pennsylvania, you know in a country in which there is no sodomy law, there are no sodomy laws in the states of the US and um just recently just a couple days ago he was found guilty of having molested a number of children over the years so to say that if you repeal the buggery law that the incidence of child abuse in this particular area would go down I can't see that that would necessarily follow because it still happens in these countries in which there is no such law."

The host posed a question to the Johns who were present in studio as well: "Mr & Mrs Johns would it then mean like in Britain a man can marry a man a woman can marry a woman then who would have the children? (all laughing) Mrs Johns: "yes I know" Mr. Johns: "It's happening already, a law is coming like Elton John for instance, you know." (host - "so women soon can't find husbands,come let's talk") Mrs. Johns continued: "well yes that what happen and the Bible says go out and replenish two men cannot do that neither can two women so you know that where we know it's wrong, it is wrong the Bible tells us first and foremost that it is wrong, alot of people sometimes say that this is old testament it tells you quire clearly in the new testament that it is wrong for two man to sleep together, two men and two women to sleep together, you know cause you cannot have children, two men cannot have children and two women cannot have children."

Shirley Richards interjects: "You know what too Mrs. White (the host's name called for the first time) what they need to explain to Jamaica David Cameron needs to explain to the Jamaican people you see is why is it HIV/AIDS is still, is out of control (host - "in the countries in which...yes yes") in those countries .. maybe they need to reinstate the law (host - "France has one of the highest cases of HIV where it has been legalized for so many years") among that population among the msm population, the highest incidence."

The host, one Mrs. Blossom White asked if could we suffer and loose financial aid if we don't legalize it in Jamaica? Mr. Johns replied: "That's the problem is the government going to hear the British law? (host- "yes yes") aah if they do and the cutting of funds that means they are open for all kinds of things .. and the Bible say in Leviticus 8 that it is abomination." The host continued that the present Prime Minister that people's private actions have public effects. Miss Richards responds: "Let me tell you why (host - 'yes yes") let me give you an example of that over two years we spent approximately $594 million I think it was on just prevention of HIV/AIDS, you understand? in a country which is strapped for cash and this is just prevention you know, 594 over a two year period, when you look at it the doctors have said anal sex anal penetration ids the most efficient way of passing on the HIV/AIDS virus, shouldn't we then be warning these people against these types of activity? eeeh (host - "..and the mental pressure")

In closing the host asked the guests to give their final words:

Mr Johns: "Be more opened minded and make sure you know what's happening in the world because these are laws being brought in the back door and you just find about these things happening until the challenges, you need to be more aware."

Mrs. Johns: "As Christians out there as people in Jamaica be ye very careful because we in England alot of us as Christians sort of sit and says it doesn't affect us but it affect all of us in the end and whenever you go to get a job or anything like this so many people in jobs in England they cannot speak out against homosexuality, we were fortunate we didn't have a job, we were retired people and we could speak but there are so many people that have been muzzled in the job places, so be very careful and Christians stand up for what you believe in, stand up like the three Hebrew boys, stand up and say God will deliver." Mr. Johns intervened: " ...and we are not into gay bashing (host - "no we not we not destroying anybody, that is their right as it were.") don't go out there and do things, you know?

Shirley Richards: "Yes I would say to Jamaicans just find the ways of letting the government know of your disapproval with the repeal of the buggery laws"

Prayer by Mr. Johns ............ program ends

So we see folks we have a long way to go it seems with old misconceptions and confusing paedophilia related to us is still ripe in the minds of the traditional Christian community and some members of the legal profession.

Peace and tolerance

H

Gay Parenting (a view on the ground) Functional Bisexuality, family units & the discourse

So last night's (May 3rd) discussion at Open Mic Open Soul was one of the best ones yet where we looked at Gay Parenting from a mother's point of view seeing Mothers' Day is approaching Sunday May 8th 2011, the night feared well as persons mostly women as it was intended filed in and were seated, our presenter for the evening was already seated in her mini-van in the beautiful flowered outdoor setting under the cloudy but moonlit night as rain fell some hours before. Her 32 minute PowerPoint supported delivery was simple and not to wordy or over intellectualized as others who have come before who seem to be about impressing the audience more than engaging and stoking discourse. This session of course was also a follow up discussion to a post from my sister blog Gay Jamaica Watch on Gay Parenting (a view from the ground) in 2009 that has been getting some attention recently as International Family Day approaches as well which is slated for May 15th. Another same gender loving women's group is also planning a family day out with activities at a private resort around that same period.

Several interesting pointers were vigorously debated and put forward with regards to having and rearing children via several means:

Surrogacy:

Some of the participants were willing to have a surrogate act as an incubator with one of the partner's eggs used and a sperm donour or close gay/bisexual friend taking on that role. Persons felt though that they needed to have the child conceived naturally and not by a third party, even if their own eggs were removed and implanted in the third party's uterus, they felt it should be natural from start to delivery, the child will be more connected to the mother.

Turkey Baster:

A few persons also preferred this method (device show above) as it would not involve any males directly which was a concern for many ladies as for using the method itself those who wanted no males involved in the insemination process preferred a professional performing it than doing it themselves however.

Live donour:

One couple much to the clear unease of some participants expressed their preferred method of having a male friend literally copulating with the willing partner who will carry the pregnancy to full term and delivery, the man would not necessarily penetrate the would be mother for any protracted period but use outercoursal methods such as masturbation or have another male partner to assist via frottage or intercrural sex (leggings - penis between the crotch for friction leading to ejaculation) femoral/interfemoral sex/intercourse or Irrumatio, also called irrumation.

One other participant said that seeing she was bisexual she had not problem having full on sex with a male partner providing all the needed tests were done such as HIV and sperm count if only just to have the child then proper arrangements would be made following as to his involvement or not with their development and growth.

Existing child/children:

A couple present had a 7 month old baby present all wrapped and cute, this had the ooohhs and aaaahhs flying a they revealed their bouncing toddler to the audience while not prepared to reveal how the child came about they proudly stated they had already given him both their names, they shared their mostly positive experience from the delivery room to anti natal clinic to the other follow up visits that they still are conducting for the child's care. Much to the surprise of many including myself they said the nurses and staff at the Spanish Town hospital where the child was delivered all knew and they in some instances addressed the other partner as the "baby father" whenever she visited despite her very feminine look as she is not butch identified. Two other women substantiated the claim as they also related their own stories describing how they were treated as a couple with very courteous and positive feedback but as was expected there was lesbophobia for one woman who arrived afterwards and stated her ordeal at the Bustamante Children's Hospital during her and her then partner's visits there was open hostility and persons expressing their dislike for same sex parenting. The positive experiences was welcomed news as this shows real progress in some aspects on the ground.

.

A female teen the daughter of a lesbian who was also present spoke to the audience of the verbal abuse from other kids who taunted her about her lesbian mother, she is one of five siblings who are all aware of what goes down. She also expressed her love for her mother which brought almost everyone in earshot to tears.

Adoption:

Some participants expressed their willingness to adopt and in fact our presenter shared her personal family set up where she is a bisexual professional and her male counterpart is fully aware of the arrangement, they all reside close to each other and share rearing the four children invloved, two of the children were products of the original marriage while one was the product of the female partner from a previous union. The fourth child was fostered recently with a view to full adoption, the eye opening revelation was shocking to some as the reactions proved as jaws dropped and the questions came flying from persons about the set up and how they all made it work. The photos of the combined family together was real proof that is was a real functional unit right here in Jamaica and was a fitting example to aspire to not to its fullest but at least the comradery.

Persons were urged by the presenter to formalize adoptions to include proper documentation of monies spent, taking the needed steps for naming, declaring and providing adequate support while liaising with the relevant agencies such as the CDA, The Child Development Agency. In formalizing adoptions early it can avoid a possible intervention of a male figure or previously absent father from wanting to regain full custody for example which he has a right to do if the child was not cared for or registered properly, all he would need to prove is paternity, he also can file a suit outside the Family Court in the ordinary RM court for damages and try to show justifiable cause for reclaiming the child, often times this is done out of jealousy or hate sometimes as seeing the child in a same sex relationship doing very well can bring feelings of inadequacy as a man as society stipulates men are household heads and should lead. It was highlighted that children do just as well or even better in same gender loving homes than in heterosexual arrangements as they learn tolerance, distribution of activities, they are less judgemental and tend to be very protective of their gay/bisexuals parents.

Another very good discussion at the Oasis.

Peace and tolerance

H