UK tourist: Barbados Advocate article “predjudicial and homophobic, incites hatred”

by P. O’Connor to the Barbados Advocate and Barbados Free Press

With reference to the Barbados Advocate article – Straight to the Point: Prime Minister David Cameron should apologise – by Mr. John Blackman in the advocate 30/12/12

I have just read this article whilst visiting the island as a tourist from the UK and I am stunned that a national newspaper from a modern progressive country such as Barbados would employ a journalist with such prejudicial and homophobic opinion never mind put in print the blatant manipulation of a very complex topic such as colonialism. I will explain further but your editorial staff should be ashamed to promote such borderline medieval opinion, Google results alone paint a poor picture of this gentleman’s past rhetoric and his veiled journalistic style.

Mr. Blackman does well to highlight the abhorrent nature of colonialism and the bullying practice, which the west continues to use against its former colonies as well as the Middle East. However he does not seem to recognise that it is as a result of this colonialism that such hatred and prejudices remain. This is certainly something that should not be held onto and celebrated but disregarded along with the emancipation of colonialism. As a developed country one would not and should not patronise you into assuming that you and your readers are not capable of accepting, supporting and understanding basic human rights.

Granted it is difficult to dissect the article it is written in a scholarly tone but that does not disguise the fact it is clearly constructed to direct your readers towards the writer’s homophobic stance. Absolutely no one can justify the criminalisation and persecution (to the extent of hard-labor and death penalties) of homosexuals in the Caribbean and some African countries. To be hetro or homo sexual is an orientation of which we are born life does not make us gay or straight, but an article like this promotes the idea that to be gay is to be somehow morally wrong. Would the advocate promote the prejudicial view that to be born with a disability is wrong? or to be born black is wrong? No you would not.

Cameron should not apologise for promoting basic human rights, or for suggesting that the continued physical and mental abuse of gay people who happen, purely by chance, to be born in the Caribbean or Africa should be abolished. Granted he should not resort to the tactics that are associated with a painful history, however Mr. Blackman and the Advocate should credit Barbadians with a little more intelligence, and moral understanding to recognise that they too would not condone such prejudices to their fellow man or woman.

It is the responsibility of journalists to not incite hatred and as such Mr. Blackman is abusing his position but more over the Advocate is promoting his view placing your publication stuck fast with opinions last seen in the mid 20th century, in the UK it would be acceptable to report such an article to the police on the grounds of inciting violence and your paper would receive a call from the police. Perhaps a homophobic view is in place top down at the Advocate’s offices? I challenge you to print this reply because as a straight married man on the island with my wife and daughter it goes to show you do not have to be gay to be offended by homophobia.

Pull your socks up Advocate and join in with the rest of us its 2013 not 1950.


Filed under Barbados, Culture & Race Issues, Human Rights

42 responses to “UK tourist: Barbados Advocate article “predjudicial and homophobic, incites hatred”

  1. Robert Ross

    There is nothing new in the Blackman article. It has all been said already. Blackman does point to a genuine dilemma: ‘IF the Church has condemned gayness for so long as being contrary to the laws of God encapsulated in biblical texts, how can it suddenly become right to condone it?’ The Roman church may be seen as attempting to resolve this dilemma – but without conviction. The Anglicans in Barbados have closed their eyes to it and are more worried about dress codes and attempting to look ‘trendy’ by beating their breasts about domestic violence – as always far too late..

    I think the key questions are these:

    1. In what way, if at all, can it be said that biblical texts are to be considered as ‘God’s laws’?
    2. What is the status of particular texts – the homophobic ones – to be found in both Old and New Testaments, eg the abomination texts in Leviticus and the Pauline letters? What was the cultural and social milieu in which they were written?
    3. Is biblical literalism and acceptance the only way to ‘read’ the Bible?
    4. Is God properly to be considered to be an ‘old man in the sky’ issuing orders backed by threats?
    5. Is it time to consider a godless morality rooted in consensual understandings rather than command theory?

    Until these kinds of questions are confronted, this particular debate will go on without a sensitive understanding of what lies at the root of it – and there will only be prejudiced mouthings and fist-waving from entrenched positions – which includes the idea that there is, as the writer implicitly suggests, a gay gene. I wonder whether that idea amounts to this: ‘We know gays are a pretty immoral lot. But they can’t help it so forgive them. It’s just a handicap they carry about with them.’ – this rather than say ‘The glory of life lies in its inclusiveness and its diversity and a person’s sexuality is rooted in life, so what is there to fear?’

  2. Peltdownman

    Homophobia is alive and well in Barbados. Barbadian men should ask themselves what they are afraid of!

  3. Canadian Tourist

    Robert Ross’s post left me to ponder my own feeling about gayness and gay marriage. As a cosmopolitan man, I usually feel that my gay quotient on any given day is between 4 to 7% (rising to 9% if my wife insists on using the strap-on), but alas, I digress. As a fellow man of God and as a Man of the Cloth (Minister of the Kanata Congregation of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster – May you all be touched by his noodley appendage) I wanted to explain our position on the subject. You see, I received a vision from the Flying Spaghetti Monster this evening while (as is often the case) I was cooking a grilled cheese sandwich.

    During his appearance he told me that homosexuals are gay because He has touched them with his noodley appendage. This is the reason that “experts” have had so much difficulty pinpointing what makes someone gay. And since gays and lesbians have been chosen by Him, to deny them the right to get married is an abomination in His eyes (meatballs). Of course many have argued that no major religion has ever accepted homosexuality. It should obvious to any Flying Spaghetti Monster follower that the real reason homosexuals are shunned from mainstream religion is because of blatant prejudice towards those who have been touched by Him. A bigotry that I know many of my fellow Pastafarians have experienced first hand.

    I am especially concerned because of the state of gay rights movement today. Too often gay activists argue that should be given the right to marry because of court precedent that says marriage is their “right as a human being” or essential to the “dignity ” of a relationship. Then they rely on the 14th amendment to say that they deserve “equal protection under the laws” and that under constitution gay people are “equal to” straight people.

    Well I think to time to put these arguments to rest. Gay Pastafarians should sue because not allowing gay marriage is a violation of their first amendment rights since it is commanded by the Flying Spaghetti Monster as relayed to me in my vision. Of course He works in mysterious ways and we may never why He commands that gays get married. But there is no question that He does.

    May you all be touched by his noodley appendage,

    If you would like more information about becoming a Pastafarian, please vist the link below, or your local Italian restaurant.

  4. Well Well

    No need to rehash, just visit Barbados Underground blog, this topic was beaten to death there. Some useful education was also revealed, particularly on the Adrian Loveridge and Barbados Advocate…… link.

  5. mary_clyne

    The majority of Barbadians are HYPOCRITES , a lot of then like the Republican men are CLOSET HOMOSEXUAL AND BISEXUAL, Having SEX with the same sex at night and then going to CHURCH AND WIPING their mouths PRETENDING THEY ARE HOLIER THAN THOU
    I do not know why people continue to insist that the HISTORY BOOK OF THE JEWS {history is what ever you perceive some thing to be , even though it might not necessarily had happen that way] and the books written years after the death of Jesus and change up by the Catholic Church and King James is the word of God , does the Holy Spirit really need a book to speak to the people.?!
    Mankind is mankind’s greatest enemy ,when instead they learn to live in love and harmony, look to find ways to hate , so they can feel justified with in them selves

  6. Well Well


  7. Mark Fenty

    The Hebrew Scriptures has in no uncertain terms, indorsed homosexuality as an acceptable lifestyle. Homosexuality is and has always been contrary to divine the will of God. So the argument that the church has somehow condoned the practice of homosexuality is just not fair and well founded. That’s just secular government imposing it agenda on the body of Christendom. As far as biblical literalism is concern, I was told by a preacher many years ago that the bible can be interpreted: Literally, Figuratively, symbolically, metaphorically, and allegorically.

    Nonetheless, it must not be forgotten, that in no way shape or form, does that Hebrew Scriptures advocates hatred against homosexuals. The Almighty God loves all homosexuals but what he dislikes most, is the practice of homosexuality, and not homosexuals per se.

    Now, if those who are prosecuting the word of God, lack necessary testicular fortitude to preach it as it is plainly stated. Then that should not be used as a basis to unilaterally and arbitrarily condemn the collective body of the Christendom. That’s just a group of men and women who lack the necessary Balls, to push back against the decadence in the contemporary moral order.

    Now, on the other side of the coin, there are some preachers who would not compromise their religious convictions in support of gay marriage. Irrespective of social stigma that is attached to this rather convoluted issue. In the United States for example, many preachers has done the unthinkable, they have opted to perform gay ceremonies in fear of losing they tax- exempted. So, in this respect, the collective body of Christendom should not be blamed, just these spineless these wonders.

    Finally, I’m amazed at how some tries to rationalize and hypothesize the word of God, Especially on the issue of Homosexuality. But on the issue of murder, there seem to be no dialectical discourse, aimed at invalidating the authenticity of this rather literal commandment.
    However, some of us audaciously challenge the validity of the word of God, with respect to homosexuality. We question its historicity, its authenticity and its contextualization, as it relates to a specific passage of scripture.

  8. Mark Fenty

    Mary, I’m certainly in no position to dictate to you or anyone for that matter, if God does or doesn’t exist. All I can say to you is this, God has been for me, a watchful eye and a supportive presence in my time of need. And even though I know that the idea of God, seems rather extraneous to our human understanding. Because of course, we as human beings have a propensity to validate our sense of reality, through the empirical medium. To argue from the world of practical experience for the existence of God is just not humanly possible, but that does not negates his existence.

  9. Normal Bloke?

    There are so many people in the world, not just the Winward and Leeward Islands and surrounds, who do not know anyone who is gay and just adopt the standard ‘innocent ignorant’ approach based on their upbringing.

    Insular elderly parents told them that homosexuality was wrong, perverted or against the will of God and in their confined and remote experience accepted that – it may well be any or all of those is correct but it does not make the individual an unpleasant or evil individual.

    As a 55 year old European white man who is in Barbados for three or four months of the year, and has only working class black friends on the Island (finding Bajan whites too ignorant and insular to befriend) I can only say that brazen bravado aside, my Island friends are prepared to accept people for their attitude, personality and integrity rather than purely their sexuality.

    Long live the enigmatic, pragmatic and phlegmatic approach of Bajans.

  10. St George's Dragon

    I am with the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster on this. Keep it up Canadian Tourist!

  11. Robert Ross

    God hates this, likes that, condones the other, wipes out whole peoples, applauds righteous gang rape in the name of hospitality…oh yes…and turns women into pillars of salt. Quita a fella,this old man in the sky. Glad he’s on my side.

  12. Robert Ross

    Mark Fenty

    ‘God loves homosexuals…but dislikes most the practice of homosexuality’.
    Please relate this statement to Leviticus 20:13. And please consider his attitude to incest and gang rape.Cf Genesis 19. Oh and how many wives and concubines did Solomon have? Is there something beyond my understanding here?

  13. Ivan Taylor

    I am happy to see that some one reported on this article as in 2012 in a “Civilized Society” I am often times bewildered at what comes out of the mouths of some of our people. My only comment is that being Gay is not a choice or Life style it is who the person just as is being black or white or Indian or whatever the correct term is – Unlike religion that is a Choice – well said O’conner

  14. Rastaman

    @Ivan Taylor: ‘Being gay is not a choice or lifestyle” Get real!!!!

  15. Anon - reasons unknown

    Yep, I too am most moved and enlightened by Canadian Tourist’s summation. I feel blessed to have taken the time to read his comments.

  16. 109

    “Is time to consider a Godless morality rooted in consensual understandings rather than command theory”?

    It is irrational and idealistic to think that we can live in world that is governed fundamentally by consensual understanding. Man needs in his life a set of prescriptive moral directives to curtail his unrestraint passions and desires. Now even the atheist, who thinks that there is no God, is consciously aware of the divine principles which govern his own sense of wrong and right. Obviously, in the absence of Godless morality, life has no real purpose and significance. So therefore, if heaven and hell cease to exist, then what’s the purpose of human existence?

    Clearly, in the absence of Christian morality, there is no absolute right and wrong that imposing itself on the human conscience. So therefore, man has no internal references that curtail his corrupted passions and desires. Obviously, man’s concept of conscience ceases to exist because he thinks that he has license act and do as he please; in absence of divine morality, Now, if we prescribe to a Godless morality that is rooted in consensual understanding. Then we obviously must abandon the whole concept of the Judeo- Christian ethics, which governs our sense of right and wrong. It just hypocritical to cloak behind the divine concept of morality, while given voice to a Godless morality that is rooted in consensual understanding. All in all, the idea of God is the best explanation for objective moral values in the world. If God does not exist, then objective moral values cease to exist in the world.

  17. Well Well

    Would love to hear comments on the Androgynus males now manifesting themselves, AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM. In my travels i have heard so many european whites say bajan whites are way too ignorant, think themselves superior and practice insularity. In my opinion (and I am quite entitled to one) they were enabled in this disgusting behavior by the black majority who have been taught by their parents generation after generation, that the bajan white is their boss and should be respected. Everyone should be respected, and you should also respect yourself. By the way, in the real world bajan white is just another person.

  18. God

    Dear Humans,

    Don’t take me so seriously.
    Many people have come to realize the truth about me.
    That I am simply a notion in their heads.

    Thank you for your attention to this matter of delusion.
    Please attend Church,Inc. next Sunday.
    DON’T forget the money, OK?


    (that God, Rex)

  19. Mark Fenty

    “The human mind”
    Don’t take me serious I’m the human mind,some in the discipline of Neuroscience call me a Hypothetical -Construct because I cannot be seen with the human lenses. But, I do exist, because I retrieve, retains,and recapitulate information ,just because I can’t be felt by the human touch, and seen with the human eyes does not mean I fail to exist. I the mind,operates in much the same way as God, I cannot be seen with the human eyes but I live and communicates to man through the Intuitive -Conscience.

  20. Mark Fenty

    What is the status of the particular texts, the homophobic ones, to be found in both Old and New Testaments, eg the abomination texts in Leviticus and the Pauline Letters? What was the cultural and social milieu in which they were written?

    Robert, it is funny how some people have a propensity to rationalize the bible in such away, as to accommodate their particular state of affairs. Their try to justify in their minds, that a particular passage of scripture reflects a specific historical context, and therefore, has no relevant application in our contemporary context. I do agree that the idea of God is a metaphysical concept predicated upon one’s belief. And that it is quite difficult to validate conclusively through the empirical scope of practical experience that he exist.

    On the other hand, I do believe that if one place specific emphasis on the irrefutable laws of nature. That one would find sufficient reason to validate with some degree of certitude that the Hebrew Scriptures are plausible. Now, even nature teaches us that the same sex relationship within the specific habitats of the animal-kingdom is contrary to the unchangeable laws of nature, and this in essence grants credibility to God existence.

    Now, I want to be honest here, I’m not here to besmear those who engage in the practice of homosexuality, or to decry the practice of same-sex marriage in no shape or form. I’m certainly in no position to pass judge on no one’s right to exercise their freewill, because of course, I’m a sinner like everyone else and fully capable of contravening any aspect of God’s laws.

    But, what I’m here to do is, unfold before you my individual feelings, couple with the Hebrew Scriptures position on homosexuality. Now, if those that advance the argument, that the Hebrew Scriptures has it wrong as far as homosexuality is concern. Then their might as well declare the bible to be invalid on the topics of: incest, fornication, marriage, rape, idolatry etc. So we might as well declare the bible to be an antiquated the document that isn’t relevant in our day and time, If we continue to adhere to the position that the passage of scripture which decries homosexuality, does not reflect our present world context.

    In addition to what I’ve written thus far, I might as well add this bit of information to support my claim of God’s existence. Some theologians and philosophers have argued for the Intelligent Designed, by using the concept of the clock and the clock-marker, as well as the prime mover to support their thesis of the Intelligent-designed/ the existence of God. But this argument has met some difficulty with the introduction of Darwin’s theory of Evolution/ Survival of the fittest. However, we can rest a little easy because world renounced atheists such as Richard Dawkins and his disciple Dr. Sam Harris, has now admits that there is some evidence which points to validates God existence.

  21. Mark Fenty

    At the higher cortical level it appears like some has been desensitized to the divine principles and convictions which directs their thinking. Because it appears rather hypocritical, when their claim to be atheist, secular -humanist, and existentialist etc “during which time their cloaked behind the divine concept of morality. While giving voice to the verisimilitude of Godless morality rooted in consensual understandings.

  22. Dessalines

    @ 109 Quote “It is irrational and idealistic to think that we can live in world that is governed fundamentally by consensual understanding.”
    This myopic view of judeo-christian religious history stupefies me. So tell us 109 what prescriptive moral directives pre judeo-christian societies had to guide them morally.
    The Chinese, Indians, Africans, North and South American peoples were ignorant of Jewish history or their holy book the bible pre 13th century yet we don’t read of these societies self destructing or turning to salt. On the contrary one can reasonably argue that the advent of the holy books into these societies through missionaries and colonialization (African and N. S. American Indians notably) was the beginning of the end of civil society and the introduction of genocidal atrocities. Slavery did not exist in North America until the Puritans introduced Christianity to the natives and women were treated as equals in those cultures. It was the church during the dark ages of Europe that tortured young women into confessing to being witches before being burnt alive. It was the church that condoned both implicitly or explicitly the genocide of millions of Jews in Germany and Europe in general. The church was swift in excommunicating progressive minds in Europe like Galileo, however Hitler and Goebbels never were. As Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord”

  23. Mark Fenty

    @ Dessafines
    Please get your facts right, because Christianity first made itself felt on the African continent in the 1st century, and not the 13th century as you seem to suggest. And should I accept your unqualified opinion on fact value? You haven’t present one expert testimony which gives validity to what you’re endeavoring to convey. Do you really trust what the history books are telling you, have you tested it with the tools of common -sense and reason to validate its authenticity?

  24. Mark Fenty

    Dessaliines, we have to test what has been inculcated to us with the measuring stick of reasoning, and research. I’ve heard and read what you have recapitulated about, and to be quite honest, I view it with a grain of salt. Knowledge is the progressive discovery of our own ignorance, and the more we study,the we realize the incredulity of human knowledge. The Bible tells us that divine knowledge is the principle thing and when we seek divine knowledge we have to seek understanding as well.

  25. Mark Fenty

    Who gives a damn what Hitler thinks, he was unlettered and ignorant of western history.

  26. Mark Fenty

    You have argued the since the introduction of the Hebrew Scriptures, that it has contributed to what historians has labeled Primitive Societies. Yet against we have witness someone who has taken what the history books has said at face value. Now, ,historians have argued that prior to the introduction of the Hebrew Scriptures to these Primitive cultures, that many of them practice Human Sacrifice on a large scale. But, thats not to excused those who used the bible to justify they wrong doing against the Primitive societies.

  27. Mark Fenty

    We just cannot accept at face value what the history books project into our faces, we have to examine it through the processes of Hegelian -dialectics, and the Socratic -method.

  28. Robert Ross

    Mark Fenty

    “We just cannot accept what the history books project into our faces”.

    Now ‘dialectically and socratically’ I ask you ‘Isn’t the Bible a history book?’

    You can’t pick and mix’

    Now tell me, was Lot a ‘righteous’ man when he offered his daughters to be gang raped? What would ‘God’ say?

    On the word ‘abomination’

    Do you read that as ‘abominable in terms of the holiness code’ like shunning ,menstruating women? And what of ‘fags must die’ a text you persist on ignoring?

  29. yatiniteasy

    People are always referring to the Bible as their source of truth…yet there are clear and frequent cases where writings in The Old Testament are 100% different to The New Testament. Example…the” eye for an eye” old testament teaching, versus..”turn the other cheek” in the New.
    Then there are those that really believe that God created the Earth in 7 days…The Gay issue can not therefore be settled by referring to the Bible.

    The Catholic Church is faced with mass (excuse the pun) desertions because of wickedly turning a blind eye to the thousands of young innocent people who have been sexually assaulted by their priests…in many countries, sometimes inside the very Church building! Bishops, Cardinals, all conspiring to hide, defend and move offending priests around, instead of having them face trial for their crimes.
    Religion is a sham, and God must be quite upset with what churches and their leaders are doing in his name.

  30. Mark Fenty

    Yestinieasy, it is clear that you haven’t the slightest idea about the Hebrew Scriptures, the nation of Israel lived by statutes, ordinances, testimonies, and covenants.So therefore, when Jesus came he abolished certain aspect of the old testament ” especially an the eye

  31. Mark Fenty

    Yestinieasy, it is clear that you haven’t the slightest idea about the Hebrew Scriptures, the nation of Israel lived by statutes, ordinances, testimonies, and covenants.So therefore, when Jesus came he abolished certain aspect of the old testament.

  32. yatiniteasy

    Mark…I never heard of Jesus “abolishing “teachings in the Old Testament..I must have missed it in my Bible classes.
    And if the Old Testament or parts of it are no longer valid (as per JC abolishments) why do we not just have The New Testament as the one to follow?
    Or…we could just start using a whole new book..but then again the Mormons already did that. Another example that Religion is a scam.

  33. Mark Fenty

    Robert, the bible records the history of God’s people the Jews, so you use your own judgment to make the determination. The Jewish people have some three -thousand years of history behind them Robert. So I appeal to you again, to use your intellectual judgement, in deciphering whether or not the bible can be viewed as a history book.

  34. Mark Fenty

    I could not disagree with you more on your observation, that Jesus did not abolish certain aspects of the Old Testament to make way for the New. Jesus may not have articulated this verbatim, but his coming certainly made this possible. Nonetheless, I think that when we seek to understand the Hebrew Scriptures, that we appeal to it with the vehicle of common-sense, logic, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It is obviously, sheer naivety and a lack of intellectual luminosity on our part, to accept without some form of intellectual preciosity, what some has teacher taught us in Sunday school.

    Moreover, I’m cognizant of the fact the Christian religious dogma, teaches that Jesus came to fulfill the law and not to amend it. Certainly, those of us in Christendom can form a consensus around the fact, that certain aspect of the Hebrew Scriptures is no longer applicable. And it serves chiefly as record of historical reflection, which shed on the vicissitudes the Nation of Israel encountered in they walk with God.

    Now, I can point to several examples with in the Old Testament which to give voice to my argument, that certain aspects of the Old Testament has been abandoned to make way for the New Testament. In Levitical Judaism, the practice tabernacle-worship, alone with animal- sacrifice was abandoned after Jesus imparted to his people the Holy Spirit. Also, no way in the New Testament did Jesus deal with the issue of tithing, as it was dealt with in the book of Malachi, so that’s also obsolete? Yatiniteasy, you must have forgotten that the Ten-Commandments constitute the central corpus of the Old Testament. So therefore, if we abandoned the Old Testament completely, we might as well close shop on the Christian religion. Final point, In Hebrew 8:13 it speaks of a new covenant, it says, “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” Now, what is a Covenant? Well, a Covenant is an agreement, usually formal, between two or more persons to do or not to do something specific. So it is evident the Jesus coming set in motion the abandonment of Moses written covenant, for the one he placed in our hearts. Jesus Said that, “I will put my laws into their minds, and I will write them upon their heart Hebrews 8: 10”.

  35. an observer

    Mark Fenty needs to find a purpose in his life.

  36. Then why only pick and choose the parts of the Levitical Law that you consider obsolete? Homosexuality is not in the Ten Commandments, but within the Levitical regulations that are replaced with the New Covenant.of Jesus. And Jesus doesn’t mention homosexuality. Not even once. But he does tell us, “Judge not, that ye be not judged”.

    Perhaps, Mr. Fenty, you need to work on that part!

  37. Mark Fenty

    Glenn, you’ve made a valid point that is worth some consideration. And it has caused me to give further inquiry into the basic tenets of the new-covenant. I must say though, that I do agree with you that no way in the bible can we recall Jesus addressing the issue of homosexuality. However,one can easily argue that Jesus did not address all of the issues regarding Sin, while on earth. Remember now, Jesus said that, “He did not come to change to the law but to fulfill it”. The bible states clearly in Colossians 2:14, that Jesus Blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.” Is Jesus talking about the old-covenant here? I guess it is left to one’s own interpretation wouldn’t you say?

  38. Mark fenty

    We might as well accept this new phenomenon of criminal activity, in Barbados as the new normal. Because until there is some amelioration in the economic conditions in Barbados is will continue.

  39. Mark fenty

    We only have to take a closer look at the perpetrators of these crimes,and we’ll ascertain the answers to this problem. A group of unemployed youth hanging on the street corner spells trouble for any society.

  40. Mark fenty

    So, in order to address the issue of crime in Barbados,we must first address the concerns of the youth, the posterity of the country.

  41. Mark Fenty

    What difference does it makes whether you are white or black ,you all have been screwed?

  42. Victor wallace

    If Mr. Cameron were ever inclined to grant the odious Mr. Blackman his wished-for apology, then he should say something like this: “Britain enslaved your ancestors and that was WRONG, (but by no means unique). Britain brainwashed your ancestors and instilled certain (largely religious) ‘morals’ in them in order to better control them. These poor people then repeated what they had been taught to their children and so on; that is why you have grown up to be such a homophobe and a bigot. I am not personally responsible for this tragic train of events, but none-the-less, I am truly sorry. My hope is that you can find some way to escape the ugly shackles of your former colonial masters’ outdated and discredited teachings and GROW UP!”
    (Which by the way, despite the weight of Oliver Cromwell’s Taliban Protestantism and Queen Victoria’s ‘values’ on our own skinny shoulders, is precisely what we’ve been attempting to do over here.)