The Blogmaster does NOT support hate speech or hate crime and abhors bigotry and prejudice wherever and whenever it shows. However, there is the obligation by democratic societies to protect the right of citizens to practice freedom of speech. How societies evolve to be inclusive will have to be managed sensibly by today’s leaders. There is no room for the usual rhetoric.
Addressing hate speech does not mean limiting or prohibiting freedom of speech. It means keeping hate speech from escalating into something more dangerous, particularly incitement to discrimination, hostility and violence, which is prohibited under international law.
— United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, May 2019
Decisions we make are influenced by a moral compass. The degree a society is able to align to the collective beliefs and perspectives of citizens is a work-in-progress exercise. No absolutes, many shades of grey. Enlightened citizens understand we must unapologetically participate in our system of governance to ensure civil society actors are sufficiently aligned to collective values. The challenge oftentimes is that issues of morality are not black and white.
For many Barbadians- dare we say the majority- the Christian Church represents the last bastion of what defines old fashion traditional values. It is place many believers seek refuge. It is a place a believer should not expect to be abused physically or emotionally. Physical and emotional abuse should be viewed through a black or white lens.
The blogmaster received several communications from a man residing in Europe who alleged he was abused by a catholic priest now deceased by the name of Aidan Dean, a Canadian who presided in Barbados during the 70s. The victim in his search to find emotional closure tried to initiate an investigation in 2017 to discover if other young men had been similarly abused in Barbados. Fr. Andy of St. Dominic’s referred him to Fr. Harcourt Blackett. The victim spoke to Fr. Harcourt on the phone, however, he reported Fr. Harcourt’ s attitude was :- “ yes some people still alive who will remember him [Aidan Dean] but don’t spoil the memories and image that these people may hold about this person. Brush, dirt, carpet”.
Emails sent to Fr. Harcourt and Charles Dominique were subsequently forwarded in 2018 to bishopaccountability.org because Fr. Harcourt ignored the cry for assistance from the victim. bishopaccountability.org is a website dedicated to victims and families of victims of abuse by the catholic church. The blogmaster can only speculate why the matter was not pursued by that entity.
I am a 61 years old man living in Northern Ireland. As a boy I spent a period of my life living near to the Dominican priory … England. At that time a friendship was formed with Fr Aidan Dean. I was lonely and vulnerable. Fr Aidan was a close family member who ate at our table at home and was held in great esteem by my parents.
Fr. Aidan gifted to me money, a Toshiba radio cassette player and other things and sexually abused me – I am still haunted by his nudity, physical encounters. his breath his lips etc. He is dead no. What happened shaped my life – kept contact with me through university and performed my marriage ceremony.
Extract from an email sent by the victim to Fr. Harcourt Blackett, Charles Dominic and bishopaccountability.org.
As a result of the abuse the victim underwent a psychiatric evaluation and ongoing therapy is recommended. The client reported extensive and repeated sexual abuse by Father Aidan Dean between the ages of seventeen and nineteen. The client reported that the abuse took place in the priest’s bedroom in ‘Hawksyard Priory,’ off …. The client recalls being touched, fondled, and kissed and regularly experiencing penetrative sexual abuse by Father Aidan Dean. The client recalls the priest telling him he loved him, giving him gifts, and treating him in a way that made him feel special.
Extract from the Psychiatric Evaluation Report to determine the therapeutic needs of the victim.
The blogmaster’s hope is that those with answers meet with the victim to facilitate closure to the matter. Newly installed Bishop Neil Scantlebury should move with haste to attend to the disturbing accusation. One does not expect a priest of the calibre of Monsignor Vincent Harcourt Blackett to show the level of insensitivity described by the victim. The blogmaster notes Fr. Blackett recently accepted an engagement in St. Vincent. The blogmaster also notes a communication sent by the victim to Barbados Today on Monday, 5 December 2016, 21:22 was ignored.
A decision by the government to support same sex civil unions with legislation was shared by the government in the much anticipated Throne Speech last week. The government cloaked its support for the decision by promoting Barbados as being “in the vanguard of pioneering social justice, the protection of civil rights and the battle to ensure dignity to the poor, marginalized, vulnerable and dispossessed…is prepared to recognize a form of civil unions for couples of the same gender so as to ensure that no human being in Barbados will be discriminated against, in exercise of civil rights that ought to be theirs.”
The government stopped short of also recognizing gay marriage to avoid a battle with the Church and a society happy to be labelled Christian.
It is hardly a secret the blogmaster abhors the homosexual lifestyle. However acceptance across the globe, especially in so called developed countries continues to rise. Using simple natural law theory a man was born with a penis, a woman with a vagina. This makes it self evident what the creator intended. Some will call-out the blogmaster as being overly simplistic and this is fine.
The blogmaster has never gotten tired of David vs Goliath anecdotes. It is the mindset which gave birth to Barbados Underground blog in April of 2007.
If you don’t believe in something, you’ll fall for anything. I believe everything happens for a reason. If you are strong from within, you can will anything. I’m a firm believer that where there’s a will, there’s a way.
It seems Barbados is about to release the homosexual genie from the proverbial lamp at a time when many countries are still debating the issue. The question that must be asked is why the rush? Is Barbados being forced to prioritise what is rightfully referred to as a wedge issue as a requirement to competitively sell the Barbados Welcome Stamp initiative? Is this a case of Prime Minister Mia Mottley because of an overwhelming mandate from the electorate in 2018 and a predilection for the fairer sex feels now is the time to force the change at this time?
The blogmaster understands we have to treat all citizens equally BUT there is something wrong with same sex relationships.
Barbados is an island built on traditional values, it seems we are about to graft homegrown values with those imported from overseas. How will the propagation work out for us? Only time will tell.
The Donville Inniss trial in the USA suffocated the local newsfeed in recent days and prevented the blogmaster – absent the noise – from sharing thoughts about other matters. Now that we have touchdown in the Inniss matter with the predictable verdict being returned, it is time.
Two images were posted in the Nation newspaper on the 12th and 18th of January 2020 which captured the attention of this blogmaster.
One image emblazoned on the Sunday’s front page of the 12 January 2020 showed the beaming countenance of Peter Wickham and Giancarlo with the caption – “Regional political consultant was formally married to his partner of the past ten years, Giancarlo Cardinale yesterday at the Hotel de Ville in Strasbourg, France …
Some will accuse the blogmaster of being homophobic after posting this blog. You are free to do so. Individuals are free to live lifes as they chose, once done within the boundary of the law. We live in a world where same sex unions are being given the ‘weight’ traditional marriages. The beef this blogmaster has with the Nation Media House is the decision to insert the picture on the front page AND referring to the union as a marriage.
Barbadians are a people wedded to the traditional view that a marriage is ” established between two people of the opposite sex.” The Nation newspaper as the leading media outlet in the country has a duty to responsibly share information that accurately influence given the power of media to influence (manipulate) public opinion. After all we have the vulnerable in society to shepherd. Posting Wickhams so called marriage on the front page brings into serious question the quality of decision-making at the Editor’s desk at Nation Publishing.
The second picture does not require an exercise in the prolix and can be explained in a few words – one must thrive to make the best decisions at all times Verla et al.
While most remain distracted with the dos and don’ts of political-economy, the Mugabe regime in Bulbadhus has made prophetic the admonitions of OSA. Arthur had told all who would listen to him that he would never leave the BLP in the hands of Mugabe. While Mugabe, like Obama, pretends to be singing from the same hymnal as ‘his’ forbearers, ‘she’ has spared no effort in the construction of a tapestry of interlocking networks of ‘her’ LGBTQ ‘folks’ within the very ‘seat’ of governmental power in Bulbadhus. ‘It is a hidden government (within a government) operating like a mafia’, a source close to the administration tells us.
We, for a year now, have been receiving reports that regardless to the point of approach one has to navigate a series of LGBTQ networks, characterized by differing personalities and with no less than an obvious determination to empower their people. Not that Barbados is unfamiliar with this ethic, however the overt politicization of this brand of ‘identity politics’ in Barbados represents a stark departure from the past and delivers for Mugabe, like Obama before ‘her’, the undisputed title of the first lesbian prime minister of Barbados, maybe in the Caribbean as well.
We have people, near to and far from Mugabe, coming to us, making the same general types of complaints, they go like this. They would go to Mugabe or she would call them in to meet and then a referral is likely to be made. The making of such a referral it turns out, time after time, to be the equivalent of ‘kicking the matter into the tall grasses’. A grassy area infested with ‘bullers’ and ‘wickers’ experienced to have a firm, unbreakable, commitment to the LGBTQ mafia and to that mafia alone. This means that anybody who is seen as not having the required links will see their proposals and projects ‘offered-up’ to members within the LGBTQ government networks for exploitation. It is not our case however, that these formations are necessarily monolithic.
We have a report that there was a certain directorate which was preferred for a specific person. However, a senior member of the mafia thought that that allocation could have been redirected elsewhere, to a place nearer home. And it was Mugabe, ‘herself’, who then had to behave badly, as badly as we would expect a ‘lion of a woman’ could in order to install a known kleptomaniac instead. We have these kinds of reports but seek not to get anybody in trouble.
And Mugabe continues to play this double-game with the people of Barbados, exhibiting dangerous, even existential, contradictions. For example, she has oft opined, publicly, that the population is getting older, that there are not enough younger people in the population. Very well! But how is the covert and overt promotion of the LGBTQ discourses and praxis, as a national project, to serve population stabilization and development. Are we somehow on the threshold of a scientific breakthrough where men could breed other men or women other women? How could it be possible, for a prime minister, with a straight face, could preach one thing but actively seek to subvert that which Ma’at, Ptah, Sambo, Ani have thusly ordained? Indeed, how is the destruction of the human species by the LGBTQ ‘folks’ any less profligate than the killing of up to 300 life forms monthly? What are the links between the people who are close to her, people who served to sterilize the Barbadian population for decades, the eugenicist and now these LBGTQ people currently controlling the government of Barbados? How it is that Mugabe could redirect economic support from the traditional family structures while seeking to elevate other formations where there is no centrality of children, all in the dead of night? These, and more, are internal contradictions which the Mugabe regime can never reconcile nor does it pretend to.
LGBTQ people, now the GoB and their supporters are unthinkingly supporting the extension of imperialism. An end-stage American, White imperialism which can go no further but being on its death bed seeks to gnaw on the bones of those who still believe that it has something to offer them. It asks us to forget that none of the structural problems of capitalism have been solved, can be solved. These are the essentially questions of race, class, poverty and all which flow therefrom. In response, capitalism and imperialism pretend to present a social formation to deliver comfort to people who see themselves as having issues separate from those which we all suffer. Irrational identity games currently at play are no substitute for radical and fundamental transformation necessary. They cannot avoid the cultural dead-end facing us!
It is no secret that Minister Denis Lowe is NOT a person held in high esteem by the BU household. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he belongs on the lowest rung of the moral and ethical ladder. He will be remembered by BU first as Peter Allard’s stool pigeon and second as the Cahill Energy instigator. Do a search of ‘Lowe Allard’ and ‘Lowe Cahill’ in the BU search box to secure bedside reading.
His recent swipe at those who advocate for same sex marriage and women who are childless has catapulted him into the news cycle, again. To quote him about same sex union, “I still believe in the biblical way of life,” and the dig at Mia Mottley, “he was not about to support any idea that the greatness of the nation is bound up in any individual who does not regard the importance of motherhood, of family, and of marriage according to the biblical standard. We want our boys and our girls to grow up in a society where they are not embarrassed because they live in a house where mum is a woman and dad is a man”.
The BU household is not a fan of the homosexual lifestyle whether born or learned, BUT, we respect the right of any individual regardless of sexual orientation to coexist with their fellow man without fear of being persecuted or discriminated against. And our laws both in the spirit and letter should articulate that ALL minority groups in our society are protected. After all, we live in the 21st century!
“There is a lobby that is trying to get the government, trying to get successive governments, in Barbados to decriminalize, as they say, homosexuality,” Stuart said. “But you can only decriminalize something that is already a criminal offence.”
He acknowledged that almost every family includes people who are LGBT, but stated that the country’s Christian character precludes any further steps to change the law.
Stuart then launched into a condemnation of many of the aims of his country’s LGBT rights movement.
“Those people, who feel that we should create an environment where they can practise their lifestyles in public on high noon on a sunny day,” he said, “want even the very limited controls we have, removed.”
“We respect that — as long as you don’t become too evangelical about it and want to convert all of us to it,” Stuart said, prompting a round of laughter in the room.
While the prime minister arguesthat the buggery laws are about consent, he’s contradicted by a prosecutor who actually brought forward charges last year.
Elwood Watts, principal Crown counsel in a buggery case, said in no uncertain terms that buggery does not require consent. “As long as the penis enters the anus, and there is a complaint, it is an offence,” Watts explained. “It does not matter if you claim the person consented or did not consent.”
And according to LGBT activists, the prosecutor’s views reflect how the law is viewed by everyday people, the police and the courts.
The dig Lowe made at Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley is not worthy of a response except to confirm BU’s lowly opinion of the man who represents Christ Church East.
“If public opinion were to be decisive, there would be no need for constitutional adjudication…” per Chaskalson P -South African Constitutional Court [1995}
It should not be thought that the recent and eventually successful claim of Mr Caleb Orozco in the Belize High Court that I commented on last week went unchallenged by anyone, even though we have learnt subsequently that the state itself will not be appealing the decision and, I suppose, will be amending the law as recommended by Benjamin CJ in his judgment to the effect that “This section shall not apply to consensual sexual acts between adults in private”.
Readers will be aware that the debate over removal or retention of the “buggery laws” as they have come to be known, has seen conflicting stances taken by those who consider the act, especially between two males, to be a nearly unpardonable sin by reference to sundry Biblical injunctions and by those who view the expression of love between any two adults in private to be no business of the state and even less so that of the criminal law. Indeed, since the law as drafted also criminalizes acts of buggery even between consenting spouses in the privacy of their marital bed, the legislative overreach should be clear to the most rabid advocate for the retention of the legislation.
It should be no cause for surprise then that three of the interested parties opposed to Mr Orozco’s claim were the Roman Catholic Church in Belize, the Belize Church of England Corporate Body and the Belize Evangelical Association.
Whatever might have been the authority attached to the views of these bodies had the matter been adjudicated in the Biblical realm, his Lordship was careful to emphasize that “the issue before the Court must be determined by reference to the fundamental rights provisions of the Constitution and not b[y] recourse to public views”. In this regard, he adopted the reasoning of Lord Bingham in Reyes v The Queen in 2002 where he had asserted, “In carrying out its task of constitutional interpretation the court is not concerned to evaluate and give effect to public opinion…”
And while, of course, the respect and influence of the churches in Belize were not to be ignored, it bore reminder that Belize was a secular state with a written Constitution that provided for the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms.
Benjamin CJ dealt also with the preambled provision, similarly to be found in the Barbados Constitution, that our nation is “founded upon principles that acknowledge the supremacy of God…” He considered it trite that although Belize was a predominantly Christian nation, the reference to God and the Creator went beyond Christianity, given the protection accorded to the individual freedom of conscience that was inclusive of freedom of thought and religion. In his view, the reference to God and the Creator did not serve to import religious principles into the interpretation of the Constitution. It should be noted, as an aside, that the local Constitution makes no express reference to the Creator as does the Belize provision that stipulates “the equal and inalienable rights which all members of the human family are endowed by their Creator…” He concluded that the reference to the Supremacy of God did not import any specific religious perspective but merely acknowledged the historical origin of the fundamental rights in natural law.
A similar issue had been in previous dispute in Canada where the Charter of Rights and Freedoms makes an identical reference. There, in 1991, Muldoon J affirmed that Canada remained a secular state notwithstanding the reference . On his interpretation, “It does not make Canada a theocracy …it prevents the Canadian state from becoming officially atheistic…”
The chief resistance by the churches to the claim of unconstitutionality of the provision was based on the express limitation of the right on the basis of public morality. In this context, the Anglican Bishop purported that the provision, even though infrequently enforced, was “integral to the protection of the common good and public morality to the extent that its repeal would be inimical to the preservation of society as ordained by the Creator”. While this argument would carry some force were the law to be rigorously enforced, the seemingly plain disinterest of the state where the act is consensually effected in private does not support a claim that the state has any interest here whatsoever in preserving society according to the ordinance of the Creator, the letter of the law or otherwise. His Lordship the Anglican Bishop went further, asserting that the practice of homosexual acts is inconsistent with the witness of sacred scripture and against the natural order of creation.
The President of the Association of Evangelical Churches insisted that the section existed for sundry reasons of safety public order, public morality and public health. As his brother, the Lord Bishop was before him, he is unwittingly of the belief that the mere passage of a law ensures compliance with these dictates. As most contemporary compliance metrics are structured however, the true test of the function of a law is its effectiveness, a phenomenon that fails to pass muster in light of the notorious absence of any enforcement of the provision at all.
The Roman Catholic Bishop in his submission saw the principal function of the law as preserving a moral climate for members of the society to prosper and avoid vice and he suggested further in his affidavit that “an alien world view was being foisted on the people of Belize.”
Benjamin CJ did not accept these views although he conceded that they were “representative of those of the majority of the Christian community and perhaps of the population of Belize.“ However, he noted that the Court could not act on act upon the prevailing majority view or what is popularly accepted as moral. For him, there must be demonstrated, but it had not been done, that some harm would be caused should the proscribed conduct in the provision be rendered unregulated.
Again, the ineffectiveness of the legislation through an absence of enforcement forecloses any such likelihood, for if there is no visible harm in the existing context, the removal of the provision could scarcely be expected negatively to alter circumstances.
As I hinted last week, the local position, for a number of reasons, is not in pari materia with the Belize situation.Any repeal of section 9 of the Sexual Offences Act must therefore be effected by a parliamentary act (!)and it would take quite a courageous administration to effect such a reform.
Our contentions have always been that a vagina represents the most sacred of places, as incubator for all life. We are adamant it is the only Heaven we have known and want to know. So concepts like sex working and establishing rivals to Her should not stand.
The claims to the presidency of the United States as being made by Hillary Clinton rest entirely on this anatomical feature which she claims to possess and has planned for its strategic deployment.
So foreign policy could be used to demonstrate the creative destructive power of vagina. ISIS, not as the sublime, but vagina employed for global warmongering. And Victoria Nuland, as the Hillary backed neocon, ‘poking’, even ‘pokeying’ the great Russian bear.
This monologue coming immediately after ‘the first gay president’ imbues the discourses with a kind of unnatural urgency to get a vagina in office. To correct a perceived historical wrong ….. Obama as a person out of turn.
Yuh know there is a certain pecking order which Obama did not pay due regards to. That order says White males should be first, then the White woman, then the Black woman and after that any number is to be played. But then again, we could be wrong on both counts. Whether Obama possesses a ‘back’ vagina or whether he is non-White. These issues will require some investigation, by others.
So we have White women like Gloria Steinem and others, who present themselves as leaders of women rights, making the vagina case of Hilary. Steinem el al are women who for centuries benefited from White privilege and the exploitation of Black women. And like Clinton, they continue so to do, today!
They shamelessly continue with a vagina monologue even when we have shown them that their so-called progressive ideals are self-centered. That Black women, even before White women existed, possessed traditions far more advance than White women currently have.
These are the White ‘progressives’ who promote homosexuality. Present bulling to the world as a normalcy. All this at a time when rural women, in particular, but all women generally are suffering more and more because of the most grotesque mal-distributions of resources since the first Hadzabe woman over 200 thousands years ago.
But Clinton sees herself as the first women to be president of the USA. For her, this is the time of firsts. It might even be helpful to that cause if she were shown as a lesbian.
Recently, Yoko Ono made disclosures relating to this matter. Ms. Ono stated clearly that she and Hillary Clinton were ‘lovers’ while she was married to John Lennon and Hillary to Bill. Of course, these revelations will not be covered by mainstream media.
The vagina monologues even include issues of bathroom usage. We sometimes wonder if those who call themselves Black progressives and support the bulling agenda, they can’t see that none of these gospels changes the underlying nature of the racist society White people have constructed.
So we are now to have a Hillary monologue which says that big-hard-back-men, dressed in mini-skirts, are to use the same bathrooms as little girls. This is the result of the most perverse misguidance ever known to woman.
And it never bothers the proponents of these unnatural practices that the sacred American civil rights traditions are being sullied on the altar of a highly questionable agenda.
The vagina monologues of Hillary Rodham Clinton and her cohorts aim at setting up a modern, recognizable, dynasty of homosexuality. And the corporate elites are on board for they will always support any distractions which could prevent us from charging the Bastille.
It is time for the useful idiots, who delude themselves that they are part of some grand civilizational project, to wake up or they will be sold out, again, like what happened at the heights of the AIDS crisis. For White society there is really only one value metric – money, not tail.
KINGSTON, 25 April, 2016— UNAIDS condemns killings and violations of human rights against transgender people reported in recent months by civil society and media in different countries of Latin America and the Caribbean, including Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Guyana, Honduras and Venezuela.
In Bolivia, through a press release issued last week, the LGBT Collective denounced the deaths of two transgender women in the city of Santa Cruz, requesting that the State accelerates procedures for investigation and punishment.
In Venezuela, according to a report by the online magazine Panorama, seven transgender people were killed between February and April, three of them in Barquisimeto.
In Brazil the situation is also serious. Glória Crystal of the organization Livre Orientação Sexual e Identidade de Gênero told O Globo in an interview published on January 16, 2016, that since the beginning of this year 48 transvestite and transsexual people had been killed throughout the country.
In Honduras last weekend the LGTB civil society organization Comunidad Gay Sampedrana para la Salud Integral called on the Public Prosecutor and the human rights organizations to ensure that the death of the transgender activist Alejandra Padilla does not go unpunished.
In Argentina, last month, repressive and violent actions carried out by law enforcement officers against transgender people were reported in the province of Salta, during eviction operations.
Violence against transgender people in Latin America and the Caribbean is compounded by their lack of access to justice. Last month in Guyana, three transgender women were forbidden to attend court or to appear before the court because they were wearing female attire.
According to the report on violence against LGBTI people in Latin America and the Caribbean published in December 2015 by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), trans women are immersed in a cycle of violence, discrimination and criminalization which usually starts at an early age with exclusion and violence suffered in their homes, communities and schools.
UNAIDS urges governments in the region to do everything in their power to investigate, prosecute and punish those responsible for the killings of trans people and increase their life expectancy through measures that reduce vulnerability to violence and death.
At the same time UNAIDS urges states to promote a culture of human rights, in order to reach the goal of zero discrimination. Without this it will be impossible to end the AIDS epidemic by 2030, as part of the Sustainable Development Goals.
UNAIDS also expresses full support for the Latin American and Caribbean Network of Transgender people (REDLACTRANS), in its efforts to end the intimidation and violence endured by transgender people throughout the region.
BU shares the Jeff Cumberbatch Barbados Advocate column – Senior Lecturer in law at the University of the West Indies since 1983, a Columnist with the Barbados Advocate since 2000 and BU commenter – see full bio.
“The homo thing has been the brainwashing manipulator’s greatest triumph.”Richard Hoad, July 10,2015
While we expect special interest groups, who usually base their beliefs on emotion rather than fact, to rely on propagandistic brainwashing to achieve their ends, we now live in an age where even the outcome of supposedly dispassionate scientific studies are skewed to reflect the researcher’s biases.
In next Sunday’s Advocate, Mr. Jeff Cumberbatch has promised a discussion of last Friday’s US Supreme Court decision sanctioning the constitutional validity of same-sex marriage for its “shock value and legal reasoning ” rather than its local relevance. I particularly look forward to his treatment of the legal reasoning underpinning this decision, for in my opinion it was not based on a dispassionate reading of the Constitution.
Two significant positions on gay rights and marriage have been restated by Barbados’ Minister Stephen Lashley and Republican 2016 presidential hopeful Ben Carson. In today’s environment it requires ‘balls’ to offer an anti gay position.
Submitted by Cedriann Martin – UNAIDS Caribbean Communications Officer
Please find attached a press release on the launch of the Caribbean Men’s Internet Survey (CARIMIS)–the region’s largest study of men who have sex with men and the first such research to be conducted online.
Launch soundbites from Dr. Ernest Massiah, UNAIDS Caribbean Regional Support Team Director and Dereck Springer, Director of the Pan Caribbean Partnership against HIV and AIDS (PANCAP) are attached. You may also post/play/hyperlink our message videos: