PM's response to editorial

[Lazie]

PM's response to editorial
published: Friday | May 23, 2008

The Editor, Sir:
The campaign for gay rights does not end with the entitlement to Cabinet membership. Its sights are set on same-sex unions, same-sex marriages.Where is the line to be drawn? Is there a line to be drawn?
Each society is defined by the values it upholds. It is these values that determine which behaviour is to be encouraged and which is just to be frowned upon and even sanctioned.
Values inherently involve prejudices. For example, we are prejudiced against incest and prostitution. Should we now be required to recognise the rights of incesters and prostitutes and find accommodation for them in the Cabinet?
The family unit which is the cradle of our society's values is already under severe stress. It needs to be protected and strengthened, not further undermined by endorsement of lifestyle practices which contradict the relationships on which families are founded.
Your editorial could have benefited from deeper thought.
I am, etc.,
BRUCE GOLDING Prime Minister

[Assasin]

Sound like the republicans family values to me, only better put.

Stand firm Bruce for what you believe.

[OJ]

well I agree with bruce in the bigger sense. But for him to say no gays in his cabinet how does he know that? That is the part which lends itself to stupidity. He ought to say that marriage is a union between man and woman and as for people life style that is within the law is fine. He wont dig into peoples bedroom but he wont ask and dont expect any to tell... simple

[Gamma]

yeah......him stick him neck out yes....but him wanted to give the impression that he knows his cabinet.....saying "well i don't know if any gays are on my cabinet" would have been worse.

sodomy is still illegal.

[Islandman]

I agree. I am sure that is what he meant but you are right he did not say it that way.

[Assasin]

you have fi understand some political dig in there as it was rumoured a year ago that at least one minister in the former cabinet was on the "tapes".

hense......

[Mosiah]

He doesn't know if there are incesters (is that a word?) or prostitutes there either!

[Mosiah]

Sodomy? Or buggery?

And how is buggery defined?

[Mosiah]

Same thing, my research tells me. But it would be interesting to note the definition of buggery. Unless we as Jamaicans want to define in our way.

[Bricktop]

Sodomy? Or buggery?

And how is buggery defined?

What?

[Mosiah]

What?

[Gamma]

buggery is kinda wider.....in the noun sense....

[Mosiah]

sigh. could you have put that another way?

[Bricktop]

Nuh di same ting? How is "our" definition different than others?

[Mosiah]

I don't know if our definition is different. First you have to define it. What is your definition of the word?