The Christian community in Jamaica is grappling with the dilemma of how to embrace homosexuals while not condoning their sexual orientation and lifestyle... ...Jamaica is a pluralistic society as well as a robust democracy... And I prefer this to a theocracy

Church Picking On Gays


By Byron Buckley , Contributor

ALAS, PRIME Minister Portia Simpson Miller has named her Cabinet, notwithstanding the fear and hysteria expressed by some clergymen during the recent election campaign, about the possible inclusion of homosexuals in her administration.

Indeed, the overwhelming political mandate, in terms of seat count and geographic spread, given to Mrs Simpson Miller and her party is perhaps a rebuff to those who sought to vilify her position that she would appoint persons to Cabinet positions based on merit rather than sexual orientation.

It is shameful and scandalous for a Christian to support the victimisation (beat the B-man) and discrimination (job denial) of homosexuals and any other groups of persons.

The Christian community in Jamaica is grappling with the dilemma of how to embrace homosexuals while not condoning their sexual orientation and lifestyle.

Why do Christians regard homosexuality as an exceptional or grievous sin?

It is in a Christian's 'DNA' to object to homosexual practices. After all, homosexuality runs counter to the natural principle of procreation established by God. Copulation by Adam and Eve (not Steve) ensures the continuation of the human race. In underscoring this point, God, through Scripture, has regarded homosexuality and bestiality as morally reprehensible.

unnatural, sinful and inimical

Throughout Old and New Testament Scripture, God has expressed displeasure at men and women engaging in unnatural sexual acts with persons of the same sex. The Bible has even come out against men behaving effeminately. Importantly, the Bible forbids other kinds of sexual immorality, including fornication, incest, divorce/adultery and prostitution. Indeed, St Paul told Christians at Corinth that persons who practised homosexuality, adultery and idolatry, among other sins, would not enter God's kingdom.

So, the Church is on message in its opposition to homosexuality. And this article is not a call for the Church to abandon its teaching and stance against homosexuality as unnatural, sinful and inimical to procreation and family life as designed by God.

However, this is a critique of the Church's extreme and selective attitude towards homosexuality and those who practise it - which is contrary to Christians' mission to share the good news with ALL.

New Testament writers refer to homosexuality as part of sexual immorality in general. So to be consistent, the Church should oppose, with equal energy, adultery, fornication, wife-swapping, incest, paedophilia and the high rate of broken marriages. The Church can't cherry-pick its favourite sin to oppose. Homosexuals see straight through this double standard and ask, 'Why discriminate and victimise us?'

What's the real reason Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed? Although Christians often point to the destruction of these cities as caused by rampant homosexuality, there is reason to believe the practice was one of a suite of sinful behaviours that God found offensive. The Hebrew prophet Ezekiel explained the iniquity of Sodom and Gomorrah as pride, fullness of bread (material wealth), abundance of idleness (hedonism), lack of care for the poor and needy, haughtiness and abominable (homosexual) practices.

transformative mission

So, again, Christians have chosen to take their own meaning or emphasis from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. A more apt message to take away is that as a society, we should ensure that material prosperity does not cause us to descend into an orgy of immorality and sensuality. We should also ensure that we take care of the disadvantaged, the poor and needy. This is why Christians should never be found in the position where they are supporting harm being done to anyone - especially with the Church's dismal record during the Crusades and the transatlantic slave trade.

The transformative mission of the Church requires it to display a higher standard of behaviour towards homosexuals. Christians should be leading the way generally in protecting the welfare of homosexuals. Christians can't join the rowdy chorus of 'kill or beat the B-man.' The challenge for the Church is to establish a caring and grace-filled environment that enables it to share the transformative gospel with homosexuals as well. Jesus Christ came to heal the broken-hearted and set the captives free - in short, to transform lives.

The Church cannot be selective about who it ministers to, nor can it place boundaries against groups - such as homosexuals - as if they are beyond God's love.

I believe while there are persons who have accepted their homosexual orientation, others have not. This is where the Church has a mission to offer counsel and healing. But a condemnatory stance by the Church will only drive away such persons who are likely to be befriended by the wrong crowd.

The homophobic (I deliberately choose this word) reaction by some church leaders and Christians is tactically foolish. In the grand culture war and cosmic struggle between good and evil, Christians must secure victory with the weapon of love, which will bring transformation to individual lives.

Maybe Christians have adopted a hard line against homosexuals because, in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, God destroyed, rather than mercifully saving them.

But that's not the full story: Sodom and Gomorrah could have been saved if there were enough righteous people there! In the final analysis, no matter how repulsed Christians are by the haughtiness of some homosexuals, we should leave their fate to God.

In the meantime, we anticipate the PM carrying through her campaign promise to debate and review the law against buggery, allowing legislators to vote according to their conscience and upon their constituents' advice.

No doubt, the voice of the Church and faith-based community will be heard. After all, Jamaica is a pluralistic society as well as a robust democracy. And I prefer this to a theocracy.

Byron Buckley is an associate editor at The Gleaner. The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the newspaper. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and byron.buckley@gleanerjm.com.

January 8, 2012

jamaica-gleaner

Obama, Buju & gays

Ian Boyne

Jamaica's President of choice in the United States, the deeply loved Barack Obama, facilitated an historic and far-reaching victory for gays on Wednesday when he signed the first major piece of gay-rights legislation into federal law, an act seen as path-breaking as the 1960s civil rights legislation.

Large numbers of Jamaicans, who share a cult-like adoration of Obama and an even more vehement aversion to homosexuals, must be in what the psychologists call cognitive dissonance. It's just hard to hold those two things together in one heart. Rationalisation is usually the way out. What seems undeniable, though, is that Obama is the most gay-friendly president the United Sates has had - at least publicly.

From his presidential campaign he made it clear that he would advance the cause of gays as part of his overall mantra of inclusiveness. He had promised to support this new legislation, labelling as 'hate crime' violence against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people, putting it on par with crimes against persons for racial, religious and ethnic reasons. Gay-rights activists see this as a major victory on the road to full integration in American society.

For a crime is a crime and violence is violence, so if someone gets murdered, for whatever reasons, the law has provisions to deal with that. As well-known homosexual columnist Andrew Sullivan has written: "The real reasons for the hate crime laws are not a defence of human beings from crime. There are already laws against that - Matthew Shepard's murderers were successfully prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law in a state with no hate-crimes law at the time".

The amendment made into law on Wednesday was partially in honour of Matthew Shepherd, a 21-year-old student at the University of Wyoming, who died after a 1998 beating targeting him because he was gay. His parents led the struggle for this legislation. "This hate-crimes bill is the proverbial foot in the door or camel nose in the tent that makes possible - indeed inevitable - all future laws involving 'sexual orientation' and 'gender identity', screams the Harvard and Princeton-educated theologian Robert Gagnon, who has written the finest theological work critiquing homosexuality (The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics).

Gagnon, in a paper titled, 'Why a sexual orientation and gender identity hate crimes law is bad for you', posits that this legislation "ensconces in federal law the principle that homosexuality, bisexuality and transsexuality are as benign as race, gender and disability - an aspect of human diversity that must be affirmed and celebrated. Those who refuse to go along with this principle then become encoded in law as hateful, discriminatory bigots."

The founder of the gay rights advocacy group Equality Forum, Malcolm Lazin, was not unmindful of the significance of the Obama-signed legislation on Wednesday. He was quoted in the media as saying, "This is really the first federal gay-rights bill. So it is a literally historic moment. This is America acknowledging homophobia as a social problem". For Republicans and conservative religious folks, this is a major retreat for America, morally, as the gay lobby advances in its mission of gaining full acceptance - and even persecuting those who would beg to differ.

Fears are being expressed that free speech could be endangered by this legislation, in that strong opposition to homosexual behaviour could be construed as incitement to violence. For example, if someone quotes the Old Testament which says homosexuals are to be killed (and it does say that) and a homosexual gets killed nearby afterward, could that person be charged with inciting violence? Or if one preaches that homosexuality is an "abomination", which the Bible says, could he be prosecuted for a hate crime?

In 2007 two 16-year-old girls were arrested on hate-crime charges for distributing about 40 fliers on cars in the student parking lot of their school, featuring two boys kissing. The pamphlets also contained what was considered anti-homosexual slur. The assistant state attorney for the county, Thomas Carroll, stated then: "You can be charged with a hate crime if you make a statement or take an action that inflicts injury or incites a breach of the peace based on a person's race, creed, gender or perceived sexual orientation." And another Assistant State Attorney, Robert Windon said, "We do not feel this type of behaviour is what the First Amendment protects". Hate crimes are now part of federal law and the rub is, what can be deemed to be incitement or inducement to violence?

Preachers and ordinary Christians fear that they might soon not be able to as speak out against homosexuality at all. There was an important protective clause in the legislation which was subsequently taken out and which would have given more solace to conservatives. When the Bill was originally introduced in the US House of Representatives, it contained this provision: "Noting in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise of the First Amendment to the Constitution".

cause of concern:

But House Democrats deleted the following words: "the free speech or free exercise clauses of the First Amendment to". That these words were omitted is a cause of concern to conservative religious people, particularly the Christian Right. There are already disturbing indications that hate crimes legislation can lead to an abridgement of free speech. In a number of European and Scandinavian democracies, verbal opposition to homosexuality has been punished.

Gagnon cites some examples from neighbouring Canada where free speech infringements have been flagrant as a result of simple opposition to homosexuality. For example, a Roman Catholic priest who writes for Catholic Insight magazine has been fined and threatened with imprisonment for speaking out against homosexual behaviour. One Roman Catholic activist, Bill Whatcott, has been fined for producing pamphlets calling homosexuality immoral. Pastor Stephen Boisson was ordered to desist from expressing his views on homosexual behaviour in any public forum after he wrote a letter to the press denouncing homosexuality as immoral.

Says Gagnon expressing fears about the impact of the passage of this new federal law : "The argument that free speech protections in the US constitution will prevent such abuses from taking place rings hollow in view of the inducement to violence provision in Title 18.2 and in view of the fact that even Supreme Court justices have taken to citing precedents in foreign law (e.g. the Lawrence sodomy decision). Moreover, we already have instances in the US where 'sexual orientation' laws led to abridgements of other liberties".

Most Jamaican Obama lovers would be deeply disturbed by a speech he gave at the Lesbian, Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) Pride Month Reception at the White House. They would be alarmed that the President could even welcome homosexuals with open arms to the White House. But the President welcomed the gays by saying "Welcome to your White House".

In this speech delivered on June 29 this year, President Obama made this frightening statement (as it would be to fierce, visceral opponents of homosexuality here) : "I suspect that by the time this administration is over, I think you guys will have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration."

In this speech (what does Betty Ann Blaine think?), Obama spoke, some would say, patronisingly about those who "hold fast to worn arguments and old attitudes". Obama pointed to things already achieved for the gay community - his signed memorandum requiring all agencies to extend as many federal benefits as possible to LGBT families and his commitment to ending the ban on the entry of gays to the military.

slain homosexual student:

He said: "My administration is working hard to pass an employee non-discrimination bill". He then promised to sign a hate-crimes bill in honour of slain homosexual student Shepherd, whose parents were at the reception. (President Bush had previously refused to sign this bill)

Said Obama: "Someday, I'm confident, we'll look back at this transition and ask why it generated such angst." But he pledged to the homosexuals gathered at the White House to celebrate Gay Pride Month that: "We must continue to do our part to make progress - step by step, law by law, mind by changing mind." This is what frightens conservative people about the passage of this federal law last week.

The first black US president went on: "And I want you to know that in this task I will not only be your friend but I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights for you". Jamaicans who are said to be homophobic will have a problem with that commitment, although, happily for them, the vast majority won't see these words hidden in long-winded columns.

Buju Banton is feeling the pressure of the gays. Even he was strategically forced to meet and greet them, posing uneasily with them. But their demands were hard: He should hold a town hall meeting declaring his love of homosexuals, sing songs urging love for our gay brothers and as though that were not enough, donate some funds to the gay cause through their local organisation. Buju declined, though he is getting flack for even meeting and greeting.

It is almost impossible to have a rational, dispassionate discussion about homosexuality in Jamaica for, on both sides - the enraged anti-gay Jamaican majority and the embattled, defensive gay community - reason is expendable and emotions are at a premium. But the time is past due for a serious discussion of the issues. I am ready for the discourse. Are you -without the abuse, prejudice and name-calling?

Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist who may be reached at iboyne1@yahoo.com or columns@gleanerjm.com.

jamaica-gleaner

Bahamas Caribbean Blog International