← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

prop_8Former Minister of Health David Estwick was quoted on a Gay Website as saying “… legislation criminalizing homosexuality and prostitution in the Caribbean region were among difficult issues that the political directorate must take up urgently.” He did go on to be quoted “What are we going to do about reaching men who have sex with men when we have laws against their sexual activity in most Caribbean countries? “ Further investigation shows that the source of the story was the Caribbean Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). Earlier this month Minister Chris Sinckler at an international conference in Switzerland had this to say “Barbados has made it clear to the United Nations that it will keep the death penalty and maintain its position on keeping prostitution and homosexuality illegal.” (Caribbean360.com).

Leading into the last general election former Member of Parliament Reverend Joseph Atherley and now Minister Esther Byer-Suckoo clashed heads on the issue of homosexuality. As we know homosexuality is not an issue which politicians are inclined to state a position, i.e. in Prime Minister Bruce Golding style, although Acting Minister of Education Patrick Todd came close in parliament this week by cajoling his fellow parliamentarians to declare their sexuality, especially those who declared their assets…!

Minister Todd has since attracted scorn and ridicule at his call…was he wrong?

California is held up as the barometer to mark the progress of  the Gay Agenda. The recent green light given by Californians to Proposition 8 (52.1% to 49.9%) must have been a devastating blow to the movement. In the recent news it has been reported that 18,000 same sex marriages in the state are likely to be overturned. We will leave it to the legal eagles to anticipate how the legal maneuvers around this case will shake-out. The BU household feels fairly confident that it is a bold Supreme Court that will reject the wish of the PEOPLE who voted YES to Prop 8 in the November election.

An interesting statistic which emerged from the Prop 8 vote was the high percentage of African-Americans who voted yes, was it 70%? Bottomline, the Gay Agenda has been stunned in their quest to amend existing laws to recognize same sex marriages. One thing we know about the Gay Lobby is its persistence, they will be back.

A few weeks ago we thought we heard Peter Wickham making a telling observation. He grumbled while on national radio, he was the host of the afternoon talk show, that Black people seem to have issues! We sensed his frustration when  forced to comment on the outcome of the Prop 8 vote. What we found interesting was his willingness to shift his target from the backward Barbadian to the Black race.

The simple point we hope to make: homosexuality and immigration are hot button issues which are being engaged internationally. They are some people who would want Barbadians to believe that on these issues we are hillbillies and stand alone.



Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

69 responses to “Proposition 8 Turns To Hate: The Implication”


  1. Does homosexuality automatically equate to anal sex?

    I repeat how do you police what people are doing in their bedrooms?

    NAMBLA is Nambla it has nothing to do with homosexuality.

    We seem to have no problem with BMYGLA or BMYTLA ( Barbados Man -young girl ( ting) love association )…

    Bringing up NAMBLA is fear mongering at its most basic.

    How do you control what tow consenting adults do in the privacy of their own house???

    Do you
    1. Assume that two men living together are gay therefore having anal sex

    2. Do you intsall CCTV in every bedroom

    3. Do you excuse two women living together

    4. Do you excuse men who like to foop women in their boxies

    Please schol me…


  2. @Ruel Daniels

    Rape is vaginal sex between a man and a woman too. Buggery is anal sex between two men. Analyse those two sentences.

    Check the statute carefully because anal sex between man and woman is rape too.

    Also check the historical meaning of buggery / sodomy, because no lawyer worth his salt is going to let the court get away with saying that buggery is merely anal sex.

    Of extreme importance and critical to that legislation is the fact that there is a definition of rape but none for buggery. That my friend is not a mistake, but a mechanism which renders the buggery provision like a roundabout in the middle of a highway.


  3. ROK,

    I don’t know where you were trained in law, but contrary to your restated belief, there is a legal definition of buggery. It is intercourse through the anus, and may be committed by a man with another man and a man with a woman. Both are illegal. How do you know wht a lawyer worth his/her salt will do when faced with a legal proposition?

    @ ReuelDaniels

    What do you mean consent is irrelevant? What makes rape different from sexual intercourse? And would you be so kind as to tell me where people are prosecuted for HOMOSEXUALITY?


  4. Juris,

    I hope that you are not one of those lawyers who would guide people to believe that there is some mystery behind the law which only a trained person can see. Laymen make law and laymen interpret law and guide government and departments according to the law.

    Why are you so defensive but yet arguing the same thing as I am? A layman should not argue law? A lawyer worth his salt will deliver for his client on small matters like buggery. Where is the legal definition of buggery in the Sexual Offences Act? Who you trying to fool? You put it in? I would have to check for that amendment.


  5. ROK,

    No, laymen should not argue law, just as they should not argue rocket science or brain surgery. An Act is not a self contained piece of information; the draftsmen designs it with certain background rules and information, including an understanding of the common law. So because there is no definition of a word in an Act, that does not signify that it is meaningless. It has a specified pre-established meaning in law, and by not re-defining it, the draftsman thereby signifies that it is to retain its common law meaning. I don’t know if this is makingsense to you, but this is why everyone who can read words is not competent to give advice as to what a legal document means.


  6. What do you mean consent is irrelevant? What makes rape different from sexual intercourse? And would you be so kind as to tell me where people are prosecuted for HOMOSEXUALITY?
    *************************************
    Buggery is penis anal copulation. Male homosexuality is penis anal copulation. You can attempt to split hairs all you want, but it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

    Don’t be an ass. The legal offence is not described as homosexuality. I defined the legal offence in my earlier post. When you stab a man to death you are not charged with stabbing a man to death, you are charged with the relative offence which is murder. The same legal circumstances obtains with homosexuality.

    Most commonwealth countries in the world still have the law of unatural act on their books. The definition states, and I’ll repeat it because somehow or the other you do not seem to take in what is written. UNNATURAL ACT: The abominable crime of buggery with a human, or bestiality with an animal. That is under the Criminal Law (Offences) Act.


  7. Rape is the unlawful carnal knowledge of a female by force, fear or fraud against her will. Heteorsexual connection is not unlawful. You are mixing up apples and oranges. Female to male copulation is not unlawful in itself. It becomes unlawful when the circumstances are as I set out heretofore. Male to male copulation was, and still is in many nations, unlawful in of itself. You are confused and running helter skelter all over the place.


  8. Just for your information, the Criminal Law (offences) Act to which you refer is no longer law in Barbados. The law is found in the Sexual Offences Act 1992. And why have you not responded to me concerning the difference between pedophilia and buggery? And while I am prepared to bow to your apparently superior knowledge as to what male homosexuals do, I would have thought that they also engage in oral sex. Did you know that that is illegal too?


  9. But male/female copulation is unlawful when it involves anal intercourse. Would you agree then that the difference between rape and normal sex is consent in one and not the other?


  10. Juris

    Laymen must argue law. It is about their lives; the conduct, regulation and activities of their lives.

    Now rocket science is a different matter. Here is where you can distinguish the daily utility and effect on people’s lives which law has and rocket science do not. Where is the rocket science that regulates motor vehicle insurance, rape, buggery, nuisance, tort, etc., etc. I see that you are one who would want to think that you are in the category of a rocket scientist.

    According to you, we should not be discussing journalism and the role of journailsts. Does one have to be a journalist to discuss journalism?

    Secondly, since you hinting that you are a lawyer, I did not ask about common law meanings, but was insinuating that there are and that there are other authorities which can influenece interpretation in the absence of an interpretation in the statute; such as the Oxford Dictionary, encyclopedias, even history books, etc… but what is the first rule? its ordinary meaning, not so? You need to be a rocket scientist for that?

    What I asked you simply to do is show me the definition within the Act itself in the same way as you would find a clear definition of rape.

    Don’t press Ruel Daniels to answer your question while you here evading mine and trying to pull wool over somebody’s eyes. I can tell you where I got my grounding in law if you really want to know. I choose not to be a lawyer.


  11. @ ROK, I really do not want to know where you got your grounding in law. However, why should I need to show you a definition in an Act when for those who understand statutory interpretation the term is already defined? And you say the definition of rape in the Act is clear? Do have another look.

    When I say laymen must not argue law, I simply meant tey must not cavil over arcane points of legal principle, not that once it is defined they should not discuss it. But they can’t presume to say what the law is (as you are doing) in the absence of some legal training. And I am sorry, dictionaries, while they may be used, come fairly low down on the scale of interpretive tools. I don’t know, finally, which question of yours I am avoiding or evading, but I am telling you again, you are wrong in your definition of buggery.


  12. Clearly consenual sex between adults in the privacy of their bedroom is the central issue here… HOw do we police this?

    Do we assume because there are two men living together that they are bulling?

    Do we depend on nosy neighbours to inform the authorities??/

    clearly if it is nonconsensual then it is rape

    clearly if one of the pople involved is undergae it is rape…

    But explain to me how we police this again???

    And how do we police men who bull women?

    Still waiting!


  13. I will only make a general observation since other jurisdictions have been mentioned.

    The SOA -sexual offences act- UK 2003 has redefined the offence of rape so that it now includes non-consensual penile penetration of the mouth and has also introduced a new offence of “assault by penetration”. Parliament agreed the same maximum penalty of life imprisonment for these offences.

    It is impossible to say that any one form of non-consensual penetration in inherently a more serious violation of the victim’s sexual autonomy than another…the sentencing starting points should apply to all non-consensual offences involving penetration of the anus or vagina or penile penetration of the mouth.
    The above is Law.
    “Consent” is very important.


  14. I naturally cannot speak for others but I have never thought the “idea” of playing around in human faeces either female or male a pleasant experience…it is one I have never indulged in…with no regret.


  15. Who cares about what you get up to YB…
    what you get up to is your business aint it?


  16. me January 2, 2009 at 11:58am

    You wrote” Do you excuse men who like to foop women in their boxies”

    You asked. I have no wish to be excused.


  17. Dear ROK:

    On Christmas Day you wrote” If a policeman happened upon two homosexuals in private in the act, do you think he would succeed with the prosecution of any of them?”

    I ask : And if a policeman happened upon a happily married couple in the act of an*l intercourse would he arrest them? would the DPP prosecute? Would a jury convict?

    Because this couple who has been happily married for more than 25 years would under Barbados law be committing a CRIMINAL offense.


  18. me

    You are absolutely correct. Therefore I go on to say that the buggery provision in the sexual offences act makes homosexuality illegal is stretching it a bit too far.

    Furthermore, if you accept that no court or even a jury will convict for consensual homosexual acts under the buggery provision, it means that a person will only be convicted under this provision if it is non-consensual. So tell me what is the meaning of buggery?

    Yes there is a legal definition but not in the Act. People have been convicted of buggery in recent times and it was surely not for a consensual act, but a criminal act. So tell me how wrong my definition is.


  19. I just rereda what Ruel Daniels wrote and I have come to the conclusion that he /she must be a law student or someone with very little life experience. I also assume that he/she does not know any homosexuals personally.

    I can also assume that he/she is a perfect heterosexual who has sex exactly as proscribed by ‘Nature.’

    He/she needs to egt out and interact with real people instead of living in a fantsay world!

The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading