What if Owen Arthur was a homosexual instead of an adulterer?

Question for Bishop Seale: Why should Owen Arthur’s sin of adultery not be against the law like the sin of buggery?

by Marcus

Bajan opinion columns of late are full of righteous calls to hurl fire and brimstone down upon anyone suggesting that Barbados should remove the offense of buggery from the law. I’ll have to watch for the fire coming from above because a few years ago I decided that the views I’ve held all my life were incorrect. I was wrong. I now believe that our laws against buggery should be repealed.

The latest Bajan public focus on gay rights started with UK Prime Minister Cameron’s call to withhold foreign aid from countries like Barbados that have laws on the books against physical love between men.

After Cameron (and to the horror of righteous Bajans), Hillary Clinton then piled on like a mad woman in rugby scrum and announced that gay rights are human rights.

(On the other hand, Hillary never mentioned the sexual predation of young female interns by older males in positions of power or the abuse of good cigars, but who can blame her?)

To the far North, Canada already knows about homosexual oppression in Barbados because gay Bajans have been trying to claim refugee status in the land of snow for years – and in the USA.

People like Bishop Gerald Seale responded to calls for the legalization of buggery with arguments ranging from GOD SAYS gay love is a sin to HOW DARE Britain tell us what to do because they were involved in slavery. (Barbados Advocate: Dear PM Cameron)

I see a connection between slavery and gay rights, but probably not the one seen by the well-meaning but mistaken Bishop Seale. It is also interesting that folks are outraged about Britain and the USA proposing withholding foreign aid over a human rights issue when they were all for economic sanctions against racist apartheid South Africa.

Ahh… but those sanctions against South Africa were about black people – real human beings – not queers or “slitty-eyed” people as the Duke of Edinburgh once infamously described Chinese.

Queers, slitty-eyed Chinese – aren’t real people worthy of protection. As we’ve said before at BFP, you have to dehumanize people before you can abuse them.

That’s why Barbados supported the right of Iran to hang homosexuals and teenaged girls for having sex – homosexuals and Muslim women aren’t real people worthy of protection.

That’s why Barbados supported the right of Communists in China to slaughter tens of thousands, imprison Christians in slave camps and to kidnap pregnant women off the street, hold them down and force mothers to abort the living children in their wombs.

Human rights abuses against Slitty-eyed Chinese are fine. They are a lesser race, not fully human, so it’s okay. Besides, we need their tourism dollars.

Those Iranian homosexual teens and the Chinese women and their babies in the womb aren’t real people. Not like us. Not real human beings deserving of human rights.

Remove the law against buggery? NO WAY!

Buggery is a sin, don’t you know!

But what about Owen Arthur’s adultery?

What about adultery? Former Prime Minister Owen Arthur is a famous adulterer. I’ve lost count of the wives, mistresses and children. In truth, he’s probably lost count too. There might even be one or two women and children out there that we haven’t heard about yet. But that’s Barbados and don’t say it isn’t so!

As I read the bible, there is no hierarchy of sins: all sin is bad. There’s even something in there about women loving women in the final days and people having sex with animals: just like on the websites associated with Barbados Minister of Health Donville Inniss.

Fortunately, I’m able to read the bible and realize that it was written in the context of the times. I’m able to know that it has been translated and re-translated and revised and books have been included then excluded then re-included over thousands of years.

I’m also able to think for myself to a certain extent. I love Jesus. I am Christian. I believe IN and also UPON Jesus… but I sure don’t accept everything some people say about their interpretation of Jesus just because they have some title behind their name that means they were indoctrinated in a certain perspective.

What did Jesus write in the dirt?

I remember the adulterous woman the crowd brought to Jesus and demanded that she be stoned. She was caught in the act, but the crowd didn’t bring the man, only the woman. That was an important part of the story. Read it for yourselves. (John 8:4-6)

What did Jesus do? He wrote in the dirt. I’d love to know what he wrote but we don’t know what it was. The crowd went away and Jesus said to the woman to sin no more. He didn’t tell the crowd to stone her which was what he “should” have done according to the law of the time.

Jesus put the doubt in my mind about our laws against homosexuals, but it was my friend George who forced me to really think and challenge what I’d been taught from my youth.

BFP’s George: God’s big mistake?

In relation to homosexuals, queers, gays whatever you want to call them… I held certain beliefs all my life, and then I met God’s big mistake: George.

George must be God’s mistake because he’s, well, different. You can tell that upon meeting George. I don’t think that God made a mistake though. I think that he made George as he intended George to be. Bishop Seale says that George made a choice to be attracted to men. That’s nonsense and anyone who knows George is aware of that.

“To make it even worse, Bajan commentators are proud of their bigotry; they haven’t even learned to copy the white supremacists and declare that some of their best friends are homos.”

B.C. Pires in The Nation It’s human rights!

Remember “The men in the cane” ?

For years I hated, really hated, homosexuals. I confused pedophilia with homosexuality because I was brought up being cautioned about “the men in the cane”.

The “men in the cane” existed, but some went after the school boys, and others went after the school girls.

Nature or nurture? Are gay men attracted to men because they make a choice, because they are preyed upon as young boys by adult gays?

Or, as I long refused to acknowledge: are some folks just born the way they are?

I say we have to repeal the laws against the sin of buggery… or we have to charge Owen Arthur with the sin of adultery.

Over to you, Bajan hypocrites…

Advertisements

20 Comments

Filed under Barbados, Human Rights

20 responses to “What if Owen Arthur was a homosexual instead of an adulterer?

  1. St George's Dragon

    A slight correction for you – it was the Duke of Edinburgh who made the famous “slitty eyed” remark, not the Prince of Wales. The Prince of Wales is the one who talks to his plants.
    Another correction peripherally related to this subject is in respect of the quite widely held view that homosexuality is a white man’s invention. I can see why people who are against gays might like to think this but the history is clear.
    The most commonly referred to investigation on the subject is “Boy-Wives and Female Husbands: Studies in African Homosexualities” edited by Stephen O. Murray & Will Roscoe. There is a review here:
    http://jclarkmedia.com/gaybooks/bookreviewboywives.html

  2. BFP

    Hey St. George.

    You are correct about the Duke of Edinburgh! Marcus isn’t here now but I’m going to change it for him.

    Marcus is getting older you know. Probably dementia setting in. 🙂

    Clive

  3. what will they think of next

    Great piece BFP.

  4. Angela Ifill

    SLOW NEWS DAY !

  5. OFF with their heads!

    in farfetched slammic areas of afghanistan, dudes party with beardless dancing boys. its important that the dancing boys have no beards because only real men have beards and once the boys don’t have beards thats ok as far as sex goes..they kinda pass as women. im not saying all of slam is like this allah sure hopes not -but this weirdo stuff happens all over -no society seems exempt.
    wud like to also mention that bim fulla wicas, but it seems since there was no specific biblical incantation against female lesbians, they can be as gay as they like -no prob there. funny world nuh?
    incidentally i am a male lesbian. naked girls fill my thoughts whole day long. god knows ive been a lesbian ever since i was about 17. luv2likkit, hear them scream as they squirm. oh how sordid lol -get over it.

  6. “Nothing optional—from homosexuality to adultery—is ever made punishable unless those who do the prohibiting (and exact the fierce punishments) have a repressed desire to participate. As Shakespeare put it in King Lear, the policeman who lashes the whore has a hot need to use her for the very offense for which he plies the lash.”
    ― Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything

    More at http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/3956.Christopher_Hitchens

  7. Adulter Dude

    wot you mean bout adultery bein bad?
    Dat mean you do da shakie wit an adult, right?
    pedadultery be da bad one and we ain’t gonna tolerate none of dat here.

  8. peltdownman

    The more I read Hitchens, the more I like him. Well….erm….not HIM, but his writing.

  9. just want to know

    I trust all the men who write in this column are faithful to their wives, There are no adulterers or fornicators what so ever, every child that’s born in Barbados are living with their fathers, and are supported by them. This is such rubbish, that it make me laugh whenever I read it. Is Owen the only politician that maybe unfaithful to his wife, what hypocrite we are, seeing the speck in our brother’s eye, and not removing the beam from our own eye, first remove the plank from your eye, and maybe you will see the speck in Owen’s eye.

  10. Bad Bob

    Men have their “Needs.” Women need to be “Faithful.”
    Why can’t people understand that?

  11. 564-5644/A-4c

    Oh Bad Bob…you are sooooo 1970s, dude.
    I shame fuh you, den.

  12. Couldn’t agree with you more, and if you keep the laws against buggery, let’s keep on down the list and ban to hell all the shell fish, stop that at once!!!

  13. Fund-a-mental-list

    I guess the anti-gay types can take comfort from the Bible (Leviticus 20:13 ), but I’m amazed they don’t demand the death penalty.

    And I guess they are firmly in favour of:

    Genesis 17:10 – God tells us to mutilate our male children when they are eight days old.
    Deuteronomy 14:8 – God tells us not to eat pork.
    Deuteronomy 14:10 – God tells us not to eat clams, shrimp, or lobsters.
    Deuteronomy 21: 18-21 – if you have a stubborn son you are to have him killed.
    Deuteronomy 21:23 – murderers shall be put to death.
    Deuteronomy 22:23 – a woman who is engaged and is not a virgin shall be killed.
    Deuteronomy 22:24 – a rapist shall be put to death.
    Deuteronomy 22:27-28 – it is all right for a man to have sex with an unwed virgin, as long as he does not get caught, but if caught he must pay her money.
    Deuteronomy 23:2 – a child born of an unwed mother, and her children’s children’s, children’s, children’s children’s, children’s, children’s children’s, children’s, children’s children, may not worship the Lord in Church.
    Deuteronomy 24:7 – a thief should be killed.
    Deuteronomy 25:5 – if your brother dies you are to bring his wife into your home and have sexual relations with her.
    Micah 7:5 – husbands are to keep secrets from their wives.
    Matthew 10:35 – Jesus says that he has come to set children against their parents.
    Mark 10:11 – Jesus says that those who remarry after divorce are committing adultery.
    Mark 16:16 – Jesus says that all Jews, Moslems, and Buddhists will be damned and go to hell.
    1 Corinthians 11:5-6 – women must wear hats in church.
    1 Corinthians 14:34-35 – women are not allowed to speak in church, and that they should get all their information from their husbands.
    1 Timothy 2:9 – women are not to wear gold or pearls.

    But if not, presumably their bible is really just a bunch of optional, random ideas.

  14. millertheanunnaki

    @Fund-a-mental-listDecember 20, 2011 at 8:32 pm

    What a kick up the fundamentalist hypocritical ass! You can’t get more basic than that!

  15. Bad Bob

    Hey, 644…I’m just funnin’.
    We know that there are Dudes that DO feel like that.
    We probably know some of them personally.

  16. Newbie

    Not concern with O.A private life, that is his concern, it is his public life that has the opportunity to affect mine and that is what should concerns me.

    However I may add that I believe that the mindset that most people employ in governing their private lives they also employ the same mindset in relation to their public lives, Food for thought. No loyalty to partner may mean no loyalty to colleagues either.
    @ just want to know,
    No one would really be interested in O.A’s private life if he was just an everyday citizen. Having put himself in the public’s view as a former P.M and as leader of the opposition, we are entitle to have an opinion of his life style. This is something that politicians do not seem to accept, especially concerning their public life.
    IF YOU CAN’T STAND THE HEAT STAY OUT OF THE KITCHEN.

  17. MANJAK of MY LORDS HILL

    Two weeks ago Owen Arthur and an entourage including the ex Minister of Health Jerome Walcott…………. were in London no doubt on their annual fund raising jaunt to seek monies from the BLP/UK and to attend their end of year knees up/dinner and dance (a fund raiser)which was held at the Camden Centre in north west London.

    But before all this jollity the BLP/UK called a meeting at Friends House the headquarters of the Quakers in Britain. Friends House is situated on the Euston Road opposite Euston Station and a five minutes walk from Kings Cross.
    The ex BLP PM gave a somewhat rambling opening spiel and then opened the floor for questions which turned out to be the more interesting part of the evening.

    Asked as to his response to the British PM David Cameron’s government policy of with holding aid from countries such as Barbados if they violate or deny the human rights and dignity of gay/homosexual or trans-gendered citizens and what effect would such have on Barbados.

    Owen Arthur response was one of making light of such threats, giggling like some little schoolboy caught exercising some naughty act by his parents. With a sense of feigned righteous anger and in a finger wagging style that the pompous are prone to do, he stated that David Cameron and his ilk can no longer tell countries what to do. His attitude was that little 2×4 Barbados is no longer a colony of the British Empire and that we will take no lectures or diktats from the politicians in Britain.

    Someone should of told Owen Arthur that the question of aid tied to the human rights for homosexual people is not only a policy of the UK but also of that of the Barak Obama administration in the USA. Hilary Clinton the Secretary of State spoke of such of recent. Being pompous and bombastic before a fawning crowd of BLP flatterers in London does not constitute a serious response to an important question.

    Owen Arthur’s unintelligent anti gay rights politics is no doubt buttressed and supported by the crossed eyed bubbleheads who self appoint themselves as Deacons, Deaconesses, Rev’s, Bishops, Archbishops, and the like to fleece Bajans of their tithes as they thunder ahistorical biblical mumbo jumbo from their ramshackle pulpits.

    Oh by the way the BLP argricultural policy………….’is that little can be done Bajan soil is too thin unlike that of Jamaica’.

    On rising crime in Barbados……………..’crime is all over the world Barbados is not immune ‘.

    He just stopped short maybe of blaming the British press as the BTA is wont to do for bad mouthing Bim and stopping the tourists from coming to our wonderful little Albion.

    The Owen Arthur meeting was a depressing and dire glance through a window of Bajan politics on a cold December night in London.

    The horror is that the other lot is no way different……………in name maybe but the same reactionary, ill thought out and conservative politics espoused by small men (and women) with lilliputian minds.
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Peltdownman…………………..With the death of Christoher Hitchens we have sadly lost a great mind, a man of great wit, of letters and journalism and a titan in the global struggle against tyrants and injustice. His pen and voice is now silent.We are so much the sadder these past days. I am.

  18. millertheanunnaki

    @ MANJAK of MY LORDS HILL Says:

    Those who are from My lord’s Hill and also Government Hill have a special position to comment on matters spiritual and worldly.

    When we get comments coming from a manlike Owen who has been to the to the top of all kinds of hills things really “brown” in this little England former paradise.

    Come back home and have a little fun and laugh at the tin pot jokers running the show.

  19. Universal Sodomy

    Why would anyone limit themselves only to males when they can have each and every Barbadian taxpayer bending over for them?

  20. Pingback: Dominica: Two men arrested for sodomy on Celebrity Summit cruise ship | Barbados Free Press