Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Barrie (right) Drewitt-Barlow wants to be able to marry his civil-partner Tony (left) in a church
Barrie (right) Drewitt-Barlow wants to be able to marry his civil-partner Tony (left) in a church

BU continues to monitor the battle by same-sex couples to be married in the Church.  A recent report out of the UK indicates the first legal challenge to the Church of England’s (C&E) ban on same-sex marriage was filed on 2 August 2013. When the issue of same-sex marriage is distilled the real issues which global societies must accept is that marriage is a matter for the state. And inherent in a marital arrangement are considerations like spousal privileges, tax concessions, issues to do with estates etc. On this basis should the Church be allowed to discriminate and possibly lose its license (issued by the state) to perform marriage?

Traditionally Christian societies, Barbados included, have adopted and institutionalize marriage as a religious ceremony. However if we are to be dispassionate about this issue, the question which Barbadians and other countries will soon have to answer is: How do we safe-guard the rights of same-sex couples under the law? Even if we were to deny same-sex couples the opportunity to equal privilege to be married in the traditional form, how does the law render unto Caesar the rights that are Caesar? In the current scenario we can have same-sex couples who have co-habitated for years but are left unsupported in law with regard to the rights to property accumulated during the union.

We have two issues playing here in the context of Barbados 1) the right to marry in the traditional way and not be discriminated against and 2) the right to access laws which safeguard the rights of same-sex couples. A scan of the international news communicate that both these issues have been and are being addressed. Even if we agree that the C&E or Churches generally should not be compelled by the Court to marry same-sex couples because it is an issue for governments. what about the law? In any event the question of whether the Church is above the law and can visibly discriminate will remain on the radar i today’s litigious world. Unfortunately for Barbados and other conservative societies, this is a matter which will not go away.

In previous BU blogs we hitched the issue of the refusal of the C&E to ordain women priests at the highest level.  Using simple analysis here is a case for discrimination as well. And the lawyers will admit there is precedent for the C&E’s position against female priests to be challenged.

In the case of Barbados BOTH Ministers Stephen Lashley and Adriel Brathwaite have been vocal about defending the traditional position of marriage. We have to conclude that this is the position of the government of Barbados. In fact BU senses that it is being fashioned as a political campaign angle to be used against a Mottley Barbados Labour Party (BLP) in 2018. Mottley has long been associated with the Gay movement.

The difficulty which Barbados and other countries who defend the traditional have is that Canada’s laws allow gay marriage and the UK will likely follow given the first challenge mentioned. Given our ‘closeness’ to the USA we have been following the battle play out in the US and there is an inevitability to it. Barbados is a tourism destination, and like many countries are bound to follow positions under accepted international arrangements. BU family members listened to Jeff Cumberbatch expound on this matter a few months ago. Why the hell have we signed international accords if there was never the intention to implement relevant local law to comply?

If we are a tourism and offshore destination at some point Barbados will have to accord citizens from countries who live and work here and who enjoy certain rights in their home countries the same. If we don’t the media backlash will be painful given the planks upon which our economic base rests. We can chose to be emotional about it or face a growing reality.


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

209 responses to “The Right to be Gay”


  1. We are all gay. Or should be. The fact that we breathe should be a happy and gay thought. Happiness is an’ all dat. Happy as larks as they say. So what’s the beef? Or the pork? Much ado about nutting. So many more things to really really worry about in life.

    BUT

    “If we are a tourism and offshore destination at some point Barbados will have to accord citizens from countries who live and work here and who enjoy certain rights in their home countries the same.”

    SO VERY RIGHT. AT LAST SOMEONE TALKING SENSE. IF ONLY THE REST OF BARBADOS COULD REALLY UNDERSTAND THESE WORDS.

  2. Leap froging Larry Avatar
    Leap froging Larry

    ……”mostly analitical and provocative to say the least…..BU’s reach is all encompassing unrelenting”…..

    The Bulldog Times.

  3. Leap froging Larry Avatar
    Leap froging Larry

    How about the gays building out their own church and having their gay religion? Like everything else freedom of choice, charter and chalice.


  4. The debate and challenge is about discrimination.


  5. David

    Would you kindly explain the convention which you (Jefferson) says binds us.


  6. @Ross

    On a Brasstacks program Jeff stated that Barbados has signed of on international agreements which bind us to observing international positions. He wa quick to advise that these agreements have to be given local relevance through the enactment of laws locally. No doubt Jeff who has been silent recently can elaborate.

  7. DR. THE HONOURABLE Avatar
    DR. THE HONOURABLE

    Seems that someone here has a gay agenda.

    Whats the point ?


  8. @Dr. Honorable

    Is it possible to deal with the points raised and leave the labeling aside? Do you think you are able to perform such a task?

  9. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    Mr Ross,

    The Convention that David mentioned that I was referring to on Brasstacks is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 1966, where the Human Rights Committee has held in Toonen v Australia that the references to the word “sex” in that instrument should be taken to include sexual orientation. Barbados ratified this on January 5 1973.


  10. Question, why don’t gay couples seek to be ‘married’ in a Mosque, or a Buddhist temple, or a Rastafarian Temple, or a Synagogue?. What is their beef with the Christian Church. If gays want to be married, why don’t they seek to do it in a secular place. Like Leap froging larry said above, why don’t they go and build their own church, or what ever they choose to call it, you dont see a Christians fighting to get married in a Voodoo temple, or Moslems fighting to get married in Hindu temple. If gays want to be married then so be it, people do whatever they want, but don’t come to push your agenda upon people who want no part of it.

  11. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ bk | August 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM |

    Although there is some merit in the position you take regarding gay couples wanting to be ‘married’ in a Christian church you need to ask yourself if the gay couple are already “Christians” from birth but ‘living in sin’ why should they be denied the benefit of a Christian ritual to seal the unity of true Christian love of the heart and ask for forgiveness in their place of worship for living in the closet?

    The main Christian denominations like RC and C&E have a tradition against women being priests in charge of any church. Should we also continue that tradition and deny them their natural human rights not to be discriminated against just because of their gender?
    Why should Christian gays start their own religion and who would be their god? Cain or Lot?
    They already have a lord and saviour in a man who was never married and was always in the company of men receiving kisses in a garden late at night. So the Christian book says, not the miller making this up.


  12. @Miller

    The bigger issue is that the Church is issued a license to perform marriage by the government which this blog points out is being challenged in the UK. If we agree that this is the current state then the issue is whether the Church has he discretion to refuse deny marriage to anyone.


  13. we ought to know the creative principle and the generative it is MAN&WOMAN to be married,GAYS are not included in this mystery as the Apostle Paul said(ephesians5;31-32)for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother,and shall be joined unto his wife and they two shall be one flesh.This is a GREAT MYSTERY; but I speak concerning CHRIST and the CHURCH Marriage is a reflection of a parent family mother/father,male/female sister/brother,husband/wife.If the church marry you that is not a legal/legislative term or contract it is a Righteous covenant that is spiritual and moral that regulate the process of human life before God/Man ,if the state marry you it is not spiritual and moral it is CIVIL under the( CIVIL RIGHTS) the word legal/legislative/legalise is not a church or God’s term for marriage it is the STATE hence the legal steps to marry the same SEX. Marriage man and woman God and the CHURCH ,Marriage man&man/woman&woman the state and rights(civil&democracy) gay marriages is a mockery of GOD and his divine creation these marriages are marriabes and NOT HUMAN .DEMOCRACY vs KINGDOM of GOD


  14. @K.G.B

    On whose authority do you challenge Pope Francis

  15. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ David | August 4, 2013 at 12:30 PM |
    “If we agree that this is the current state then the issue is whether the Church has he discretion to refuse deny marriage to anyone.”

    As the law stands now, Yes! The Church has the legal right to refuse to marry anyone the intending marriage officer deems “unfit” for such ceremony.
    Neither the Marriage Act nor the Constitution prevents the practice of such discrimination by the Church or any other religious organization acting as an agent of the State.
    Until there are clearly written Statute Legislation granting inalienable rights to everyone not to be discriminated against on grounds of race, ethnic or cultural background, religion, gender, age (except with minors) disability and SEXUAL ORIENTATION -with very, very heavy penalties attached- then the backward thinking stupid people in this country like Minister Lashley the hypocrite hiding in the closet and the AG would continue to encourage people in this crap from days of slavery.


  16. Jefferson

    Thankyou. And the case you mention was when?

    (You will realize that I’m wondering whether if the case was subsequent to ratification an interpretation of the Convention which may not have accorded with understandings then might not in fact be binding – I really don’t know)


  17. OF GAY MARRIAGE
    THE STATE & CHURCH
    when the state becomes involve in the moral decision making of the citizens of a nation when it comes to MARRIAGE it will give forth poor judgment on this matter man left to himself to judge his spiritual,moral,civil character is a poor judge of himself the state can only deal with the civil side of our existence the ten commandments were base on three principle laws ,spiritual law,1st command, moral law,2ndcommand,civil law,3rdcommand .the state under the guides of democracy which is base on the (1/3 third) it can only govern on that the people that 1/3third which one third of the laws above which is (CIVIL LAW) which is a defected form of governance every thing we deal with in this nation comes under civil law first hence (politics&the rule of law) there is no spiritual moral civility coming from our political leaders they are not spiritual the first law and so on (exodos20;1-20)THE Church has failed, the institution for spiritual moral civil rectitude have over the years lost our have not gain its identity there is no respect coming from the state to the church the state&church must be the governing body of the nation to maintain and attained spiritual moral civil society the development of life for they must not be separated both church&state must be in good standing before GOD&MAN in righteousness ,righteousness exalt a nation when the unrighteous bears rule the people will morn and be oppress but when the righteous rule the people rejoice and are bless ,…


  18. In London an RC Church was in fact used until recently for Divine Service for gay people. As I remember the Bishop had a change of mind but made the point that all churches were available for anyone who wished to worship.

    Though I agree completely with Miller, it seems to me that this goes in stages: (1) a Civil Partnership Act conferring property and other rights on gay couples; (2) a permissive policy by the Church to confer blessings on gay couples; and only then (3) ‘marriage’,first civil then Church. As the Church becomes increasingly irrelevant, the last will come inexorably. It has all gone too far now to be considered aberrational. If it is, then I’m sure the Old Man in the Sky will sort it out. What would Gamaliel say?

    Although I acknowledge the value of the present discussion, I can’t help but feel there is a considerably premature element to it. If gay people here do not lobby for it all what chance is there for ‘progress’ given the established mindset?

    Is there a Society of Friends meeting place here? If there is then gay people will find a very warm welcome – or should.

    There is no longer any ‘tradition’ in the Anglican Church against females being priests in charge or, better, incumbents. Present debates (illogically) centre on episcopal promotion.

  19. DR. THE HONOURABLE Avatar
    DR. THE HONOURABLE

    The Right to be GAY
    What right to be GAY ?
    Sounds kinda silly though.Can we consider it a right
    What are the benefits to mankind, the society, the individual. Listen ,
    I do not accept it !.

    Lets denounce GAY once and for all and maybe Gay people will get the message.Lets stop feeling for these misfits. Yes I am old school. Please do not curse me and question my credentials or sanity. Please !


  20. Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that “Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.”


  21. @Ross

    it will be externally driven like most things which effect us.

    On 4 August 2013 18:04, Barbados Underground

  22. Jeff Cumberbatch Avatar
    Jeff Cumberbatch

    Ross,

    The case was 1994, but the state party also subjects itself to the supervisory machinery established under the treaty. Thus the meaning in international law is that as determined by the machinery, as Australia discovered.


  23. Leap froging Larry has made the most sense so far. If bullers want to marry each other that is their business but why do they want to force their unnatural behaviour on everyone else?

    They can set up their own church, write a gay bible and apply to the state for a license to marry their member who are in good standing or in this case good bending over.


  24. @Caswell

    Whether you or the BU household like it or not there is a legal and bigger argument to be made when ad(judging) this matter. Ordinary you are quick to apply legal precepts to how you build an argument. Why in this case you have allowed unbridled emotion to propel your argument?

    On 4 August 2013 18:25, Barbados Underground

  25. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ K.G.B | August 4, 2013 at 1:56 PM |

    A similar position to the one you are upholding was upheld by the same Church and State in relation to SLAVERY especially in conservative Barbados.

    We are not surprised. Our only concern as Libertarians is where were the same GOD and STATE when slaves were debarred from marriage as prescribed by both Church and State? Why weren’t blacks allowed to be married as your GOD ordained between the time they were first brought to the Island and up to Emancipation?
    Why was there a proscription issued by the same Church and State against marriage among slaves?
    Except for the arrival of the Moravians blacks were treated as animals that did not require a legal and religious sanctioned environment to reproduce.

    Just forget about the Biblical crap or one can argue for the acceptance of a man marrying his sister as in the case of Cain or a man having more than one wife and a few outside women like the wisest biblical character that ever lived called King Solomon who legendary sexual exploits with 700 wives and 300 concubines are unparalleled even by King Henry V111 (the man who established the CoE or Anglican Church) standards who killed a few of his own.


  26. Caswell u proverbial nincompoop and how do you propose to get all govts world wide to agree to such an outlandish idea,,,,,,,like that of issuing license to same sex marriage churches. as it its legislation permitting same sex marriages are an uphill battle ,further more only until laws are in place supportive of same sex marriages would such institutions be permitted . .you are nothing more than a walking bowl of complicated confusion. ,


  27. There is no bigger issue than requiring muslims and those who cover themselves from head to toe to uncover when visiting our island and being searched for security purposes.

    Should the Church of God stand its ground same sex marriage would not be performed for those of unlike faith. According to their faith the men to men and women to women should go to the law that uphold them which would be safer meaning their own houses and not ask the House of God to conform to them.

  28. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ ac | August 4, 2013 at 2:36 PM |

    You are in your element here, ac!
    Even your language is impressive: “you are nothing more than a walking bowl of complicated confusion”.

    Sweet and to the point. You should have added:- ‘just chomping at the bit to leave the closet’.

  29. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    i can just imagine being in a gay church and hearing one of the responses at madins
    PRIEST SAYS “LET US BULL ON IN PEACE…..”
    CONGREGATION ” AND LET US DO SOME WICKING TOO……”

  30. Caswell Franklyn Avatar
    Caswell Franklyn

    David

    I have not used emotion: I don’t get emotional about bullers. I am only concerned that they are becoming too intrusive. If they would keep their backsides quiet (pardon the pun) and do their business, I would have no problem with them but they want to force acceptance of their queer ways on society. They want everyone to change their long established norms to accommodate them. If I were to use legal analysis to distill the issues, I would say that our laws say that buggery is wrong full-stop.

    Why don’t they go to Saudi Arabia and demand their rights to be bullers. These bullers want to bully meek Christian societies to accept nonsense.


  31. I find article 16 to be interesting from a gender point of view in that it still leaves open the possibility for issues of same sex relations to be given basic human rights if need arises. I find that even though the article states ‘Men and women it does not propose that the two spouses should be of opposite gender as applied to the term spouses” whether they be homosexual marriages or heterosexual.


  32. @ georgie Porgie

    Com on man you can do better than that,,,,,,,


  33. for caswell and homophobics watch and learn. we are not alone.
    the difference between them and man is that there are free of laws that setup barriers in their way giving others the right to pre-judge.


  34. Caswell

    ‘Write a gay Bible’……LOL…there is one.

    On ‘legal issues’ Yes you are right. After all, there is still a Witchcraft Act too isn’t there? Thank goodness our law has not stood still since the year dot. To say ‘that’s the law’ is a little short sighted – and actually rather dull, isn’t it?

    Jefferson

    Thankyou. Mind I suppose it all depends on the precise wording of the Convention, the precise issue raised in the case and the reasoning in it etc etc. Yes,in principle I’m sure you’re right. But then who judges the ‘judges’ – and especially in a matter where it might be said that the Convention was being interpreted in a way totally foreign to its (then) intentions? Cf the Human Rights Convention quoted by ac.

    I agree there is no ‘right’ to be gay. Our existence and so our sexual orientation is a fact not a ‘right’. The ‘right ‘is the right not to be discriminated against as human beings sharing certain characteristics.

    Is marriage rooted in relationship or procreation?


  35. Well said Caswell.
    Bad enough that some people find themselves with their circuits mixed up…shit happens (pun intended) and we have to live peaceably with that.
    But when allegedly intelligent people can seek to convince the REST of us NORMAL PEOPLE to change all our regular rules and laws in order to accommodate these freaks of nature…one has to stand up to the dirtiness….
    Let them do their thing, but let us never EQUATE the beauty of a man and woman together in marriage to two nasty bullers or wickers by calling the arrangement the same thing…. N E V E R.

    Um is bulling/wicking….if um is OK then why are they ashamed of that…?


  36. ..besides, any issue that has Amused, Ross, ac, Peter Wickham and Miller on the same side is a nobrainer to be illconceived….. 🙂


  37. Oh and Caswell…..

    For what it’s worth I find your repeated reference to ‘bullers’ offensive and ignorant. That is NOT usually your way. Were you molested as a child?


  38. Steupssss
    The ‘right ‘is the right not to be discriminated against as human beings sharing certain characteristics.
    **************
    So should we stop discriminating against criminals and locking their asses up?
    Should we stop discriminating against pedophiles?
    How about drug pushers?

    ….and this from a brainiac?

    Oh common sense, why hast thou forsaken us….?


  39. Bush Tea

    What precisely makes you ‘normal’? I thought you were born on a self-created pedestal.


  40. @Bush Tea

    Now that you have gotten that off your chest please go pragmatic and tell us how we are to manage this issue given the global momentum and resulting conditionalities.


  41. Bush Tea

    Your analogy, which you’ve used before, about criminals etc etc is plain silly.We are talking about orientations and relationships which do not harm those in them or outside them. If they do, the law intervenes without discrimination and, of course, rightly so. Your plus or minus responses to gay people are neither here nor there. But then I suppose you have a head for heights.


  42. @ Ross
    Shiite fellow…Bushie REALLY hope that you ain’t no real real lawyer fuh true….

    What makes “normal”…?
    The same thing that makes a criminal a subject of discrimination:
    that makes a pedophile a subject of discrimination and that makes a drug pusher (unless he is a doctor like GP) subjected to discrimination.

    CUSTOM and PRACTICE and THE LAWS OF THE DAMN PLACE

    @ David
    How will we manage…?
    Just like we will “manage” the economy, the energy problems, the global warming, and all the other issues…
    Ya mean you can’t see the trend…?

    WE WON’T…..!

    Too many jokers who have NO CLUE as to the real issues …..monkeys playing with guns…
    It is the result of the natural processes of end-of-phase / end of life.

    ….ask any old person…
    LOTS OF ISSUES THAT WILL NEVER BE ‘SOLVED’…til that fateful day….


  43. Ross…
    Did YOU not raise the business of discrimination because of common characteristics?
    Do you KNOW why most criminals are criminal…?

    …and you know that homosexuality is “not harmful” exactly HOW?
    …Wuh skipper, you nearly know that sugar sweet…

    …look ..um is Bushie bedtime…
    Hold the fort Caswell… 🙂


  44. um ! bushie go to bed and stay there and a suggestion take caswell along with you maybe he can read you the bedtime story of goldilocks and the three bears……

  45. millertheanunnaki Avatar
    millertheanunnaki

    @ Bush Tea | August 4, 2013 at 3:43 PM |
    “So should we stop discriminating against criminals and locking their asses up? Should we stop discriminating against pedophiles? How about drug pushers?”

    Why not stretch the analogy a bit further (or should be say backwards) and include blacks who were considered in the past by most whites as sub-human?

    Why nor re-introduce Jim Crow laws and make the black MFs like you fight for civil rights all over again?
    As a matter of fact why not go back to the days of slavery where you BT would make a dumb ass sadistic driver in the cane fields making sure their black asses are whipped into line.

    Hello RIP Van Winkle Bushie, this is 2013 not 1713. Wake up and get with the programme; even your mate Fumble is trying.


  46. @david
    magna carta


  47. Sodom and Gomorrah ! Their END will be the same ! Their Choice ! BUT It will never BE Christian ! Christian Law cannot be changed ! GOD’s law stands ! LIFE all False Religion and beliefs they will never be Christian and God’s Laws or children ! Never Never Never !


  48. what does anyone expect from an old dinosaur like bushie who believes that beating a child with a 2×4 is the rights of a parent and is justifiable, then how can anyone believe that he can understand the basics rights of all human beings. this would be a challenge for bush tea equivalent to finding people living on mars, the man has no feelings whatsoever about life and experiences of any one. he is contented to live in that shallow cocoon of his nestled among the bush waiting for his imaginary friend to bail all of mankind out of this quagmire. everything else does not register in that one tracked mind of his which is stuck on rewind.
    the rights of gays for one reason or another is clouded in the myth that gays wants rights to have sex. this seems to be the only area of interest to the homophobes everything else surrounding and entails the gays to have basic human rights by marriage to them is a non issue and all made up.


  49. @dr,the honourable

    gay rights you get them from the state (civil law)same sex
    it is wrong and the conscience knows it

    marriage, righteousness you get it from God(spiritual law)man&woman
    we are caught in the middle it seems that our moral code of living (moral law) will be control by spiritual law(God) civil law (state)
    spiritual law(spirit)
    moral law(soul)here we are the battle for our soul desires feelings emotion wills likes dislikes choices longings cravings hungers lust
    civil law(body)

  50. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Reac | August 4, 2013 at 2:52 PM |
    @ georgie Porgie

    Com on man you can do better than that,,,,,,,

    popular gay “church” songs might include
    1 WE’ LL BE BULLING ROUND THE MOUNTAIN WHEN WE COME
    WE’ LL BE WICKING ROUND THE MOUNTAIN WHEN WE COME

    2 BULLERS OF BIM ARISE AND PUT YOUR CONDOMS ON
    3 BULLING WE GO ALONG LIFES ROAD
    4 ONWARD BULLING SOLDIERS BULLING ON TO WAR
    5 THERES PEACE AND REST IN PARADISE AS BULLING AND WICKING WE DO OH THAT WE HAD WINGS LIKE DOVES THAT WE COULD BULL ALL DAY
    6 MOMENT BY MOMENT WE SEEK TO WICK AND BULL
    WE WICK AND BULL TIL WE BELLY FULL

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

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

Continue reading