No special rights for gays (Gleaner Letter 30.10.09)

The Editor, Sir;
I see where an editorial in this newspaper has chastised both the prime minister and leader of the Opposition for not pushing to have special protection rights for violence against homosexuals inserted in the Charter of Rights Bill now before the Jamaican House of Representatives.

I am in total opposition to the views of this editorial. I am sure the writer is aware we already have laws to deal with crimes and violence against the person.

Anyone, be he preacher, teacher, gay or straight, having any act of violence committed against him or herself, has protection under existing laws.

Global campaign

Gays have stepped up their campaign across the globe, seeking new legislative protection for their behaviour in public places.

But bowing to these gay rights activists by providing them with separate laws from the rest of the citizenry would only be adding status to their behaviour which is best kept indoors to avoid any violent response, especially in a homophobic society such as Jamaica's.

Laws should never be enacted for special interests because with such precedence just about every interest group would start lobbying for their own agendas.

To add insult to injury, gays seem to be on a lobby, both in Jamaica and the United States, to make the act of extortion a legal entity in their now noted demands of monetary compensation from sales of music by artistes who verbally oppose them. Should recording artistes now lobby for laws to protect them from extortion by gays? No, there is already an existing law to convict extortionists.

Laws are enacted to convict the lawless, whether the offence committed is carried out against gays or straight and, therefore, I trust the passage of the Charter of Rights Bill will give no special legal rights to any persons or groups above any other.

I am, etc.,

MICHAEL DUNN
micberd@yahoo.com
Tampa, Florida

here is my email to him:
Sir,

Nobody is asking for special rights for gays if you haven't noticed President Obama signed the Hate Crimes Bill a day ago maybe you ought to read the document and see what it says.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:S.909:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BO-xUV61eUI&feature=player_embedded here is his message after signing listen carefully to the reasons for doing so.

President Obama on his feet:
"This not about our laws but who we are as a people, it's about whether we value one another whether we embrace our differences than allowing them to becoming a source of malice ....... the moment we fail to see in another our common humanity, the very moment we fail to recognise in a person the same fears and hopes, same passions and imperfections the same dreams we all share .. are free and equal .... able to persue their own version of happiness"

The main thrust of the Gleaner's Editorial was to highlight the weakness of our local politicians to see it as President Obama and many others including Jamaica sees it respect people for people.

The Charter or Rights is to replace section 3 of the Constitution is is not laws but a raft of
rights and freedoms as stated by categories which in the original 1999 and 2006 Joint Select Cmt reports had discrimination by sexual orientation incuded until it was removed out of fear that gays may ask for marriage rights.
So so callled gay marriage rights is now the "red herring" to push for overlooking this section and gay persons all together.
Don't confuse rights vs laws they are separate things in as far as drafting them.

Its about everyone within their space operating freely without fear or favour and tolerance our politicians are nowhere near this kind of realisation and pander to the hate implied sounds as espoused in your letter without fairly looking at the BIGGER issues involved.

I suggest also you get a copy of the hansard notes or the Joint select cmt report and see what actually transpired.

Music:
No one is trying to stop Buju Banton or any other artist from living or saying their piece but there must be a clear distinction between messages of peace, love etc vs inciting violence, hate and bigotry on any group or individual simply because of a misconception of a lifestyle. Be aware that gays also attend Buju's shows especially in their own backyard of San Fran and of course he with his management used the meeting issue as a public relations stunt as any American pop star would to get mileage, just another day in Entertainment goings.

Interestingly these same dancehall artists who some stoutly defend treat women as sex objects, gang warfare (as in the present Gully Gaza madness between Vybz Kartel and Mavado) and promote death to police informants yet we don't have the same outcry about those from the critics and the religious groups.

Simply put sir, tolerance is they key just as how different church groups, religions and races exist.

Respectfully
Peace

Hate Crime Bill goes into Law in the US .... will Jamaican cowardly politicians learn?

President Obama signed major civil rights legislation on Wednesday, making it a federal hate crime to assault people based on sexual orientation, gender and gender identity. The new measure expands the the scope of a 1968 law that applies to people attacked because of their race, religion or national origin. The U.S. Justice Department will have expanded authority to prosecute such crimes when local authorities don't.

The provision, called the Matthew Shepard & James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act is attached to a defense authorization bill. It is named after Matthew Shepard, a gay college student tortured and killed in 1998, and James Byrd Jr., a black man who was chained to a pickup truck and dragged to his death the same year.
The measure expands current hate crimes law to include violence based on gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. To assure its passage after years of frustrated efforts, Democratic supporters attached the measure to the must-pass defense policy bill over the steep objections of many Republicans.
The measure was a priority of the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., that had been on the congressional agenda for a decade. During the signing ceremony, Obama acknowledged Shepard's mom, Judy, and remembered that he had told her this day would come. He also gave a nod to Kennedy's family. Going forward, Obama promised, people will be protected from violence based on "what they look like, who they love, how they pray or why they are."

Read or watch President Obama's remarks before signing the legislation:
After more than a decade of opposition and delay, we've passed inclusive hate crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray, or who they are. I promised Judy Shepard, when she saw me in the Oval Office, that this day would come, and I'm glad that she and her husband Dennis could join us for this event. I'm also honored to have the family of the late Senator Ted Kennedy, who fought so hard for this legislation. And Vicki and Patrick, Kara, everybody who's here, I just want you all to know how proud we are of the work that Ted did to help this day -- make this day possible. So -- and thank you for joining us here today. (Applause.) So, with that, I'm going to sign this piece of legislation.

Read more HERE





Jamaicans politicians need to take a page out of Obama's book in leading from the front with tolerance and inclusion albeit it came out of a tragic loss of a life but at least the corrective measure will seek to guarantee rights for persons despite their orientation yet our leaders and a bigoted Joint Select Committee sought to remove the word "gender" in fear that gays will ask for marriage rights. The tyrannical majority rules, so what about the protection of the minority which is the essence of democracy?

Our cowardly leaders playing to the so called popular view to sure up political capital instead of doing the right thing.

see the post below The ambit of democracy (Gleaner letter 29.10.09) elaborating on the importance of rights to everyone, even the minority.

Great move US and the Obama Administration.

H

The ambit of democracy (Gleaner letter 29.10.09)

The Editor, Sir:

With respect to the letter of Everal Edwards, published October 28, under the title, 'Clearly Ridiculous', I feel compelled to point out the danger inherent in the sentiment he expresses.

The moment a society begins to cater solely to the views of the majority to the clear exclusion of a specific, or all minority groups, then that society is no longer operating within the ambit of democracy.

These undemocratic societies are then perpetually in pursuit of the dynamic status quo as they pander to the common denominator, sacrificing the essence of harmonious inclusion and space for amicable disagreement that defines democracy.

The purpose of law and government is to create a system of harmony all the time protecting the weak from the strong, advancing the welfare of all. Once that philosophy has been compromised, the resulting dysfunctional society must assess itself and try and correct its mistakes or injustice will persist.

Vitriolic rhetoric

The fact that such vitriolic rhetoric is coming from Jamaica, a society built on slavery (including mental slavery) is not entirely surprising but certainly not excusable. In fact, like South Africa, Jamaica should rise and be a beacon of hope for the oppressed in an increasingly hostile world, pointing to the right direction for the future of mankind.

I am, etc.,

BRIAN-PAUL WELSH

brianpaul.welsh@gmail.com

Kingston
ENDS


Here is the original letter Mr. Welsh responded to above:

Clearly ridiculous!

Published: Wednesday | October 28, 2009

THE EDITOR, Sir:

WITH RESPECT to Monday's editorial, 'Golding and Simpson Miller failed to lead', I find your conclusion a wholly ridiculous and disingenuous position to take.

The Charter of Rights, and any other law, must reflect the common or most common position of the people in whose interest it is being enacted. There is nothing in the charter that gives anyone the right to abuse or discriminate against someone because of their sexual orientation.

What does the writer of the editorial expect? That the norms and values of the majority should take second place to those of a minority because the latter have access to media, influence and the proverbial 'commanding heights of the economy'?

I am, etc.,

Everal Edwards

everal.edwards@gmail.com

Tips for breast cancer prevention

Rosalee M. Brown is a registered dietitian/ nutritionist who operates Integrated Nutrition and Health Services.

We are convinced that genetics play a significant role in breast cancer risk but there is also evidence that risk is impacted by factors such as food and nutrition and physical activity. A report published by the American Institute for Cancer Research and the World Cancer Research Fund on food, nutrition, physical activity and the prevention of cancer provides some recommendations for cancer prevention based on a meta-analysis of existing research.

The recommendations are:

1. Be as lean as possible. Body fat should be maintained at the lower end of body mass index or BMI for age throughout childhood and adolescence and within the normal range after age 21. Weight gain and increase in waist circumference should be avoided in adulthood.

2. Limit consumption of energy-dense foods. Avoid sugary drinks and consume soft drinks sparingly.

3. Eat mostly foods of plant origin. Eat at least five portions/servings (that is, at least 400 g or 14 oz) of a variety of non-starchy vegetables and fruits every day. Eat relatively unprocessed cereals (grains) and/or pulses (legumes) with every meal. Limit refined starchy foods. People who consume starchy roots or tubers as staples should eat enough non-starchy vegetables, fruits, and pulses (legumes).

4. Limit the intake of red meats and avoid processed meats. People who eat red meat should consume less than 500 g 

(18 oz) a week and very little of it, if any, should be processed.

5. Limit alcoholic drinks. If alcoholic drinks are consumed, limit consumption to no more than two drinks a day for men, and one drink a day for women.

6. Limit consumption of salts and avoid mouldy cereals and legumes. Avoid salt-preserved, salted or salty foods and preserve foods without using salt. Limit consumption of processed foods with added salt to help control salt intake to less than 6g (2.4g sodium) a day. Do not eat mouldy cereals (grains) or pulses (legumes).

7. Aim to meet nutritional needs through diet alone. Dietary supplements are not recommended for cancer prevention.

8. Aim to breastfeed infants exclusively up to six months.

9. Be physically active every day. Moderate physical activity, equivalent to brisk walking for at least 30 minutes every day is recommended. As fitness improves, aim for 60 minutes or more of moderate activity, or for 30 minutes or more of vigorous physical activity every day. Limit sedentary habits such as watching television.

Hypocracy from the religious bigots ....

the caption is so appropriate in our scenario......

So as we see in the post following this one from the Gleaner that the church has, as a matter of convenience sided with the DJs on bashing homosexuality, at least so they claim. In trying to distance themselves from the violence as advocated by Buju Banton and others they, the religious right to me are looking like a bunch of opportunist and waggonists using this convenient sorded episode to push their bigoted positions.

Interestingly the same dancehall artists who they now side with also promote casual sex with minors, abuse of women and ganja smoking, murder of informants, vigilante justice, glorifying acts of gun crimes as measurements of being a true man among other acts deemed sinful and abominations by the church are not met with such a loud chorus of opposition, where are they on these matters?

(night sounds and a cricket chirps)

How selective these church people are? that is not say that all christians or church folk are like this as there are more enlightened folks in the crowd they just don't or can't be bothered I guess to challenge the crap coming out of the penny section. The use of the Bible is where the selectivity really is, the same verses used as quotes to condemn us (noteably Leviticus 18) also has a list of others wrongs and ills which were prescribed for Jews to Moses at that time and to suggest that Sodom and Gomorrah argument is so lame as we all know that that homosexuality was not the predominant reasons why it was destroyed. Sometimes one should ignore this crap but I think also we must let people make fools of themselves and the public is slowly becoming weary of all this constant arguments over persons orientation and related activities. The church should concern itself about the poor and indigent who are visible to our eyes everyday on the streets who really need the help, prayer and love, the homeless children in homes whoneed care and support and stop trying to pry through my and others keyhole to see who we are sleeping with.

Waggonists
This is not the first time the anti gay church lobby has joined in a chorus of sorts to echo their anti gay sentiments, those sentiments are more often times than not have an invitation to tolerance or peace. The rhetoric is usually condemnatory in its form yet the same Bible that is used to beat us says judge not and ye shall not be judged:

Judging Others
Lk. 6.3738, 4142
1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. Mk. 4.24
3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.
6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.

How we forget the other parts of the Bible and conveniently use parts that seem divisive to justify bigotry and hate sending us to hell from the pulpit and applauding yourselves for doing a marvellous job.

I am not a Bible genius but certain actions of the church or some of it's members warrant examination. Didn't Christ also say come as you are and have we forgotten the woman with the alabaster box?

Peace

H

Charter of Rights Bill 2008 download

AN ACT to Amend the Constitution of Jamaica to provide for a Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms and for connected matters. DOWLOAD ORIGINAL DOCUMENT HERE

Excerpts from the original documents from the Previous Joint Select Committee 2006/8

The Charter's Debate recommenced in October 2009.

MEMORANDUM OF OBJECTS AND REASONS
The Government has recognized a need for reform of many aspects of the Constitution in order to meet the needs of post independence Jamaica. To this end, a Constitutional Commission was formed to examine various issues. A Joint Select Committee of the Houses of Parliament was appointed with a mandate to undertake such reform. The Constitutional Commission made recommendations to the Joint Select Committee which in tum presented its final report to Parliament for approval
The then Government decided that pending more comprehensive amendments to the Constitution, it was desirous to give effect to the proposals emanating from the Final Report relating to the Fundamental Rights and Freedoms which would constitute a guarantee by the State to preserve and protect those rights and freedoms.

A Bill to that effect was considered by succesive Joint Select Committees of Parliament which recommended various amendments. The report of the latest Committee was tabled but the dissolution of Parliament prevented any further action in relation thereto. The Government has decided to table a new Bill which incorporates the recommendations made by that Joint Select Committee.
The provisions relating to protection from torture or inhuman or degrading punishment restate the existing provisions in the Constitution. It is intended that final determination in that regard will be left as a matter to be determined by the outcome of a free conscience vote of Members of the Houses of Parliament on the question of the retention or abolition of the death penalty.
Consequently, this Bill seeks to amend the Constitution in order to give effect to that decision.
The Bill provides for protection of the rights and freedoms of individuals subject to such measures as are required for state governance in periods of public disaster or emergency or as are regarded as demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
The protected rights and freedoms include the following(a)
life, liberty and the security of the person;
(b) freedom of thought, conscience, belief and observance of religious
and political doctrines;
(c) freedom of expression;
(d) the right to seek, distribute or disseminate to any other person,
information, opinions and ideas through any media;
(e) freedom of peaceful assembly and association;

(f) freedom of movement;
(g) due process of law;
(h) equality before the law;
(i) equitable and humane treatment by any public authority in the exercise of any function;
(j) freedom from discrimination, on the ground of race, social class, colour, religion, gender, place of origin or political preference;
(k) protection of property rights;
(1) protection from search of the person, respect for private and family life, privacy of home and of communication;
(m) entitlement of every child
(i) to such measures of protection as are required by the status of a minor or as part of the family, society and the State; and
(ti) who is a citizen to publicly funded education in a public educational institution at the pre-primary and primary levels;
(n) entitlement of a person charged with a criminal offence or detained in pursuance of a provision of any enactment to communicate with and be visited by his spouse, partner or family member, religious; counsellor and a medical practitioner of his choice;
(0) enjoyment of a healthy and productive environment free from threat or injury or damage from environmental abuse and degradation of the ecological heritage;
(P) entitlement of every citizen who is registered to vote, to participate and vote in free and fair elections;
(q) entitlement of every citizen to be granted a passport and not be denied or deprived thereof except by due process of law; and
(r) entitlement of a person who is charged with or detained, in connection with a criminal offence to communicate with and retain an attorney-at-law.
as tabled by BRUCE GOLDING Prime Minister 2008

DOWLOAD ORIGINAL DOCUMENT HERE

Bahati’s bill: A convenient distraction for Uganda's government (any similarities to our situation?)

Source: Pambazuka News (click image for full article) beautiful piece and the distraction criticism can be also levied at our government and opposition parties for using gay marriage as a convenient way to deny rights to GLBT citizens in the present Charter of Rights Bill debate and as a distraction from our other major financial woes with a view to sure up ground support whilst gaining political capital.

The piece reads:
by Solome Nakaweesi-Kimbugwe and Frank Mugisha
As Ugandan MP David Bahati spearheads a campaign around the adoption of the homophobic 'Bahati's bill', Solome Nakaweesi-Kimbugwe and Frank Mugisha call for an unwavering rejection of a piece of legislation entirely against the interests of wider Ugandan society. With strong suspicions of Bahati's financial backing by extreme-right Christian groups in the US, the bill seeks not only to establish draconian punishments for homosexual acts but also to actively encourage Ugandans to snoop on one another indefinitely for the supposed good of the nation. If homophobes like Bahati were really worried about 'protect[ing] the traditional family', Nakaweesi-Kimbugwe and Mugisha argue, they'd concern themselves with tackling the conditions keeping so many Ugandans in poverty, rather than making scapegoats of homosexual people. The authors conclude that with an election approaching in 2011, the momentum behind the bill smacks of a none-too-subtle attempt to divert attention away from Uganda's true issues.

BAHATI’S 'ANTI-HOMOSEXUALITY BILL'
On 14 October 2009 the Hon. David Bahati (MP, Ndorwa County West, Kabale) tabled a private-members bill before the Ugandan parliament titled the 'Anti-Homosexuality Bill'. When it was tabled, the Minister for Ethics and Integrity Dr James Nsaba Butoro made a strong statement in support of the bill and for the greater sanction of individuals and organisations supporting homosexuality. The bill is aimed at increasing and expanding penalties for 'homosexual acts' and for all institutions (including NGOs, donors and private companies) who defend the rights of people who engage in sexual relations with people of the same gender. The bill also calls for Uganda to withdraw from all international treaties and conventions which support the rights of lesbians, gays and bisexuals, introduces extradition arrangements for Ugandan citizens who perform 'homosexual acts' abroad, and includes legal penalties for people who fail to report alleged homosexual acts or individuals and institutions that promote homosexuality or same-sex marriage to the authorities. The death penalty is mandated for HIV-positive people who engage in sex with people of the same gender. The tabling of the bill has been accompanied by threats against any Ugandan media organisation that allows LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) Ugandans to air their views or publish press statements.

Bahati’s bill is an alarmingly retrogressive piece of legislation, aimed at legalising hatred against a section of the Ugandan citizenry, but also importantly at controlling and censoring dissent and open public debate. In legal terms, the bill would set a precedent for state authorities to control rights to freedom of expression, freedom of thought and freedom of association for state and non-state actors. It would also set a precedent for government censorship of internal workplace and other policies of national and international institutions operating in Uganda.

The bill is clearly a diversion from the serious issues facing Uganda’s policy-makers today in the lead-up to the 2011 elections especially around livelihoods; poverty and the lack of jobs; electoral reforms; lasting solutions to the northern Uganda peace process; political conflict; ethnic tensions and the unresolved land question; high rates of violence against children and against women (perpetrated largely by heterosexual men); and the ongoing impact of HIV/AIDS. It also poses a serious threat to press and academic freedom, human rights activism overall, and indeed to Uganda’s commitment to the values of human rights and democracy upheld by its own constitution and by the regional and international systems to which it belongs.

WESTERN-BACKED HOMOPHOBIA

A common claim put forward by homophobes in Uganda is that Western donors and human rights organisations are encouraging the spread of homosexuality in Uganda. Interestingly, what they never admit to is that fact that their own campaigning and mobilisation against lesbians and gay people is itself funded and supported by actors in the West, more specifically the Christian rightwing in the USA. There is evidence to suggest that support for Bahati’s bill has come from extreme-right Christians in the United States of America who are working through allied churches and parliamentarians in Uganda. In March 2009 the Family Life Network, led by Ugandan Pastor Stephen Langa (affiliated to the Kampala Pentecostal Church), hosted a workshop entitled 'Exposing the truth behind homosexuality and the homosexual agenda'. The workshop trainers included members of three American organisations well-known in US Christian rightwing circles:

- Scott Lively, co-founder of the hate group Watchmen on the Walls and author of The Pink Swastika, a pseudo-history book claiming that militant male homosexuals helped mastermind the Nazi holocaust
- Caleb Lee Brundidge, a 'sexual reorientation' coach for the International Healing Foundation, a Christian organisation that aims to 'free' people from 'unwanted same-sex attraction'
- Don Schmierer, a board member for Exodus International, an umbrella body for Christian groups that seek to 'reform' homosexuals using Christian teachings.

Alongside the workshop, the Americans also met with MPs and influential religious actors. The Family Life Network has mobilised through churches across the country to deliver a petition to parliament calling for the introduction of stronger legislation against homosexuality. Bahati’s bill is the result.

It's worth noting that it costs a considerable amount of money, time and processes to table a private-member’s bill, which begs the question of how the MP from Kabale District is financing this process? It has also been common practice for the mushrooming pastors and churches to use homophobic attacks on opponents as a way to discredit each other and sway faithfuls.

Fair Observation by the Gleaner on the Charter of Rights Bill Debate

Golding and Simpson Miller failed to lead their editorial 26.10.09 reads:

We wish to make two observations. First, when politicians are short of cogent and workable solutions, their default position, usually, is a reach for populist distractions - drawing the red herring, as it were.

The second is that the real test of a democracy is not only its ability to cater to the will of the majority, but how well it acknowledges and protects the rights of the minority, including people with whose ideas and concepts we may not agree. Indeed, it is this latter notion that makes a democracy, even as it remains the best form of government yet devised, the most difficult to manage.

We have been drawn to think on these issues in part because of some of the tone of the parliamentary debate on Jamaica's proposed Charter of Rights, especially remarks by Prime Minister Bruce Golding and Opposition Leader Portia Simpson Miller. They reached for the lowest common denominator and played to the gallery, which, of course, was not necessarily the people sitting in Gordon House. Rather, it was an appeal to their ever-narrowing political base.

Enumerative fashion

The Charter of Rights is a good thing, which has the broad support of this newspaper. It seeks to set out, in enumerative fashion and relatively simple language, the fundamental rights and freedoms of the Jamaican people. Importantly, it seeks to place greater limits on the capacity of the state to derogate those rights.

Significantly, however, there is no protection in this charter for the individual who faces discrimination because of his or her sexual orientation. A parliamentary committee that drafted the final recommendations contorted its way out of offering any such protection. That was, and remains, good political cover for Mr Golding and Mrs Simpson Miller and, we dare say, a goodly many members of parliament.

The fact is, Jamaica is deeply homophobic, or pretends to be. Homophobia attends the country's sense of machismo; it frees us to go gay-bashing, and not just figuratively. Indeed, the week before the MPs began to sing their platitudes to the Charter of Rights, a young man was attacked by a mob for his perceived effeminate gait. Happily, he was rescued by the police, for which he might count himself lucky.

Lack of imagination

This brings us back to where we started. The debate is taking place in the middle of a deep economic crisis, to which the Government has, up to now, displayed a patent lack of imagination or acuity. It has talked!

We are not surprised, in the circumstances, that Mr Golding found it useful to weave into his remarks a declaration that "I will not accept that homosexuality must be accepted as a legitimate form of behaviour or the equivalent of (heterosexual) marriage".

The Jamaican Parliament, Mr Golding added, would not make same-sex unions legal - "not as long as I sit here". And he inveighed against gay-rights lobbyists who wanted to undermine the country's "values or culture".

Mrs Simpson Miller was not as extreme in hiding behind the supposed inability of leaders to be "too far in front of those who are being led" and for the positions of the majority to be taken "scrupulously into consideration".

What, in reality, was on display was weak leadership and, we fear, an unintended endorsement of abuse of and discrimination against people because of their sexual orientation.

What is the church really about? (REPOST from GJW)

UPDATED 25.10.09
Oh well my simplistic view got me in a some time ago with a christian friend of mine on what the church is really about here in Jamaica. I strongly put that some of their pundits spend so much time defending heterosexual-ism and vigorously making sure that homosexuality doesn't see the light of day in the recently debated Sexual Offences and the Charter of Rights Bills with the latter being debated presently.

I thought the church was about winning souls for Christ no matter who that soul is, including gays and lesbians. Instead some of the "intellectuals" within the church exercise their bigoted thoughts openly setting all these preconditions before the "sinner" can even see the church door.

What about come as you are and god loves you?

Most churches dismiss persons once they are found to be gay or lesbian with little or any care, isn't that defeating the purpose of what Christ decreed we as saved persons should do....."go ye into the world and preach the gospel......" not condemn people because they don't fit your Utopian view of the world.

Sad that this is what we have become, one wonders if the church by it's actions of some of who say they are saved are giving more power to the enemy notable atheists and the anti Christ supporters when we behave with some harsh discrimination, during the conversation by the way the young man said that the pastor some Sundays ago of a church he attended said he wanted no offerings from gays. So we can now decide who want offerings from, wow.

Makes me wonder if the church and biblical doctrine is used by some to forward homophobic as well as other discriminatory views maybe that explains the attrition from it's halls and corridors as most young people aren't even interested in going to church these days.

As for using the bible as a beating stick over the heads of "sinners" is just plain wrong to me. Famous among the quotes is Leviticus 20: 13

GOOD NEWS VERSION:
"If a man has sexual relations with another man they have done a disgusting thing and both shall be out to death, They are responsible for their own death"

The book also speaks of incest, having sex with a woman while she is seeing her period or sleeping with animals etc.
I understood these rules to be of the old covenant and they were intended for the ceremonies of ancient Israel as issued to Moses, The main theme of the book is to emphasis holiness of God and the ways in which the people were to worship and live to maintain holiness with God of Israel. I haven't seen anything on lesbianism in it.
I stand corrected though if you know more help me out, I am just adding my two cents but I would have thought we are now under grace not law.

Most of these books of the Bible that do speak to homosexuality never mentioned it as if God himself said it but then again he said love thy neighbour as thyself, judge not and ye shall not be judged. Romans for example was Paul's way of introducing himself to the Romans in Rome his plan was to work among them there and then gather support then move on to Spain. he wrote to explain his understanding of the christian faith and it's practical implications for the lives of Christians. While he covers the rules, conscience and holy living an underlying theme that seems to run through the book is not judging each other, something that the church these days seem to forget.

Lata

H

originally from Gay Jamica Watch

Meeting controversy, Music industry split over Buju's face to face with gays

The Gleaner has put out some articles today October 25, regarding the Buju Banton interactions and possible fall out from the anti murder music campaign.

see also:
... but his pockets burn, Cancellations of shows because of gay advocates cost artiste millions

FINALLY! The Church and the DJs agree

American civil liberties group slams gays for trying to prevent shows featuring Jamaican DJ

Buju did the right thing ...

Mel Cooke wrote:
There is a strong possibility that if reports of deejay Buju Banton's meeting with representatives of the gay community in San Francisco, California, on October 13, had not been supported by pictures, there would be those who would refuse to believe that it actually took place.
But, even in this age of 'Photoshop' where pictures can and do lie, it is undeniable that it did take place and the fallout - if any - continues back at home.

Isaiah Laing, head of Supreme Promotions which produces the huge Boxing Day Sting concert annually, on which Buju did a full show in 2006 dipping into his extensive, hit-filled catalogue for about an hour, says, "I doubt there will be any negatives."

Still, Laing says the gay community is using the meeting as a "mockery" and it does not make sense for Buju to talk about it any more. "He should just act without talking," Laing said.

"You have to survive and you survive by singing. It has been a long time he hasn't done anything about them and them still after the youth. Who are they?" Laing demanded, pointing further to the demands that the gay community had placed on Buju.

"Buju was just trying to get them off his back and eat food," Laing assessed. "It is the outer world where they are."

Still, Laing says he respects Buju for having dialogue with members of the gay community, as there is not enough of that between persons in Jamaica who have various inter-personal conflicts. "Maybe if we were doing more of that in Jamaica, we would not have so much murder," Laing said.

But Disc jock Crazy Chris, who plays on KOOL FM, says the fans will rate Buju less because of the meeting.

"You know the stance we take on it as Jamaican people. A no all Jamaican people will be open-minded and say low them thing.